Transcripts For CSPAN Public Affairs 20130725

Judiciary committee, and we had some very rancorous debate within our own party, behind closed doors, out in the committee room, here on the floor over the patriot act. Over the extension of power under the foreign Intelligence Surveillance courts. I was very concerned, even though we had a republican administration, and president that i liked and respected, george w. Bush, smarter, wittier than people gave him credit for, a good decent man, but we have to consider the possibilities, and we have to be specific in our laws, and when we debated these changes before the Judiciary Committee back in the 109th congress, when i was a freshman, there were people, my democratic friends across the other side of the aisle, that were very concerned about an abuse of power that might be occasioned if we dont tighten up the patriot act. Anal enough, i read the bill as it existed, i read the law as it existed, i was pushing for some things to be changed, and it did cause me of concern that the title what basically is section 215 of he patriot act, as it was at that time before amended, access to records and other items under the foreign Intelligence Surveillance act. As amended it would read, access to certain Business Records for foreign intelligence and International Terrorism investigations. He so i knew that was the titles. So it really applied to foreign intelligence and International Terrorism investigations. And my democratic friends across the aisle that we would often consider way left had serious concerns. And i understood their concerns. I thought they were being way too fearful of government because the law we could make it specific enough that it would not be abused by a republican or democratic administration. And as i read through, having been a judge and a chief justice, and had to consider from a legal standpoint what do these words mean . What does this word mean . Can this be considered vage, ambiguous . Is this considered vague, ambiguous . Is this considered arbitrary, capricious . Is there room for misunderstanding . I actually had some concerns, and behind closed doors i was asking people from the Bush Administration, Justice Department im a little uncomfortable about this. What does this mean . One of the things i asked about was in the reference to the proposal for the amendment, it says, for this is ill just read it. It says the director of the federal bureau of investigation or designee of the director whose rank shall be no lower than assistants special agent in charge, may make an application for an ordinary requiring the production of any tangible things, including books, records, papers, documents, and other things for an investigation to obtain foreign intelligence information, not concerning a United States person. I was comfortable with that language. That seemed to protect u. S. Citizens pretty well. And then there is this disjunctionive preposition, or, it could be that or it could be this. The other aspect was, to protect against International Terrorism. Well, i felt like at the time, i was ok if we are really seriously to protect ourselves from International Terrorism, again that doesnt involve an american citizen unless you can establish with probable cause that an american citizen is involved in International Terrorism. Nd then we get a second or, or clandestined intelligence activities. I raised the issue behind closed doors in our republican meetings justice e met with officials, im uncomfortable with this because it doesnt Say International in that part. You have the or, but you left out international there. I would really be more comfortable if it said, to protect against international errorism or clandestined International Intelligence activities. And i was told, congressman, we know we are a judge and you get caught up in words sometimes, but look at the title of the article. The article says, access to certain Business Records for foreign intelligence and International Terrorism investigations. So you shouldnt have to be concerned, this is only about International Intelligence. Its only about foreign contacts. And we were assured repeatedly behind closed doors and in debate, that this amendment to the patriot act would make it more difficult for an administration to abuse it. Republican or democrat. And if you continue to read on so, i was still a little uneasy, yet and i know that when there is a disparate between language within a law and the title of the law, the language within the law itself takes priority over the title. I know that. But it was somewhat comforting, but if you read on down this was the as we were trying to amend it, and as the Justice Department under president bush was pushing, it says, an investigation conducted under this section shall, then it has an a part, conducted under the guidelines, b, not and there is an and. You cant go without b. A be, not be conducted of United States person solely on the basis, upon the basis of activities protected by the First Amendment to the constitution of the United States. There were concerns during this debate over amending section 215 of the patriot act back in the 109th congress that we dont want the administration gathering intel about someone if it is all having to do with their activity that is protected by the First Amendment to the constitution of the united tates. So, for example, if someone were burning a United States flag or burning a holy bible, the Supreme Court tells us those are protected activities. Protected by the First Amendment. And therefore you could not use those to go gather Intelligence Data about an american who was doing those things. Now, of course, we have the u. N. And former secretary clinton and president obama and others saying, we like what the u. N. s saying. Basically if we adopted what the be said, it would still true, our Supreme Court would allow you to burn a bible and a flag, but you could never, ever do anything like that to a koran which then would allow our radical islamist friends who want Ant International caliphate to check the box that they created and was discovered during a raid some years back, that one of their 10year goals was to subjucate the United States constitution to sharia law. As soon as we adopt a law that says you can destroy a bible and flag but not a koran, they can check that box. Proposed amendment in 2005 to the patriot act, or the official title under title 51, national defense, chapter 36, foreign Intelligence Surveillance, chapter 4, roman numeral 4, section 1861. So paragraph 3 after 2, says an investigation conducted in this section shall not be conducted by of a u. S. Person solely on the basis of activities protected by the First Amendment, we get to paragraph 3. And this was an issue that was very contentious. There were groups boycotting and demonstrating and saying, hey, this is all about library books. We dont want the Bush Administration being able to go in and get a list of books we have read. Well, i contended then and still contend now that to do such a thing of an american citizen you should have to have probable citizen an american has violated the law and get a warrant to do that. But this didnt require a warrant. This allowed under the patriot act if it was for foreign intelligence purposes and for International Terrorism investigations, according to the title, but unfortunately in the law itself it said or to protect against International Terrorism or clandestine intelligence activities. I tell people at the time, im a little uncomfortable with that, because clandestined intelligence activities. What is that . What if its somebody going somewhere and asking questions . Not doing it in public, but going privately to individuals and saying, im concerned about what the administration is doing on this or that. What do you know about what this administration is doing . What have they done to you . Would that be considered somebody doing clandestined or private intelligence activities . And i was told you are being paranoid here, gohmert. Look at the title again. Its International Terrorism. Foreign intelligence. This is not about american citizens. Look at the overall context. Those words hanging out there ater a disjunctive or, it was little uneasing, but i had enough people and the Justice Department on my committee with the administration at that time that said, no, gosh, no. Youre looking for things where there arent any. This is not an issue. But this paragraph 3 in the case of an application for an ordinary requiring the production of order of requiring the production of Library Circulation records, Library Patron lists, book sales records, book customer list, firearm sales records, tax return records, educational records, or medical records containing information that would identify a person, wow, thats kind of scary when you consider that entire list of things that the justice ,epartment might be going after but it says the director of the federal bureau of investigation may delegate the authority to make such application to either the Deputy Director of the f. B. I. Or the executive assistant director of National Security. Deputy director or assistant executive assistant director may not further delegate such authority. They wanted to assure us that only people that were looking at foreign intelligence an foreign terrorism who had the big picture, not some low level rogue agent, would be mur suing pursuing anything like this, and we were told repeatedly, but its all tied to foreign terrorism. And when you go down under ragraph b, subparagraph b, each application under this ction, and two says, shall include, a statement of fact showing that there are reasonable grounds to believe that the tangible thing sought are relevant to an authorized investigation other than a threat assessment, conducted in accordance with subsection a2 of this section, to obtain foreign intelligence information not concerning a u. S. , United States person, then theres this disjunctive or, or, to protect against International Terrorism another or, or class destined intelligence activities such things being presumptively relevant to an authorized investigation if the applicant shows in the statement of facts that they pertain to and then the one i, a foreign power or agent of a foreign power. If it pertains to a foreign power or an agent of a foreign power, ok, thats not an american citizen and if it is they are part of a foreign power. 2i, suspected activities of an agent of a foreign power who is subject of an authorized investigation. En another or before the 3 little i, an individual in contact with or known to a suspected agent of a foreign power who is the subject of such authorized investigation. And then it talks about minimumization procedures. But then under subparagraph ittle c2, it gives this order, this direction to a judge who may be asked to issue an order, an order under this subsection, capital a, shall describe the tangible things that are ordered to be produced th get this sufficient to be fairly identified. That gave me confident comfort. The surveillance intelligence court judge who is nominated by the United States president and confirmed by the United States senate thoroughly investigated by the f. B. I. , theyre the only people when theyre assigned to the fisa court that could issue an order like this and the law says that their order has to be with sufficient particularity. And we know from the law under the constitution that if you want to go every specific private information about people, you have to have a warrant and that warrant has to be based on probable cause and the probable cause must be established by a sworn statement and there must be we cient specificity that dont just have blanket orders to go get information. Know when i was an assistant d. A. Up in northeast texas we had a deputy come in one time and it was the policy if you want to get a warrant signed by the district judge you need to come through the d. A. s office first so we can help you make sure you got probable cause, make sure theres proper specificity. Great gentleman. Older deputy. And he was always after this tiny Little Community in our county. He said, i know theyre smoking dope out there. I just know it. Ive sat out there and surveiled their house and i havent seen them with dope but i know they got it. So he came in one day and he said, ive got them. I get a warrant now. Well, what do you got, deputy . Well, you know our little Convenient Store out there in our community was broken into and one of the things they tole was potato chips. Ok. So what does that have to do with a warrant to go after marijuana . Well, the place ive been surveiling and watching, i found out absolutely for sure theyre having a Party Friday Night and theyre going to have potato chips there. So all i need is a warrant to go look for potato chips and while im there ill find the dope. I said, is there anything identifiable on the potato chip packages that would allow you to determine these were the potato chips stolen from the Convenient Store . No. Theyre just potato chips. Well, deputy, im sorry. Thats not sufficient specificity. Ive known since law school, ive known since i was a d. A. And years as a judge and chief justice, you got to have specificity. The constitution requires it. And so basically thats what this provision is requiring. You got to describe with sufficient particularity that people can identify the specific items that youre demanding to be produced. Thats why when we all looked and saw Information Sources that a fisa court judge had granted an application for a warrant for every phone call made by anybody in america whether outside the u. S. Or inside the u. S. , i couldnt believe theyd find a judge that would sign that. I mean, sure, you know, you might can find some judge in some jurisdiction that maybe didnt have in that location and that court, you didnt have to go to law school. You didnt need to understand the constitution, but the justices of the peace i know know you got to have some specificity here. You cant just come in here and ask for everybodys phone record in the country. And so i have to say about my friends on the far left of the political spectrum that were suspicious back when we were pushing for and being pushed, really for an extension of the patriot act, they had concerns that somebody might come in and get Library Records without adequate out ble cause and it turns their concerns about Library Records didnt come close to the danger that this act would pose for an administration that felt like they should have everybodys information. I talked to people on both sides of the aisle and this may be one of the few rare issues where my sense is everybody truly wants the same thing. But when you look at what is being gathered, this was never, ever anticipated. I cant remember if it was publicly or privately in our conversations when we were discussing this extension of the patriot act, i was demanding sunsets so we could still have accountability and demand answers when we wanted them but either privately or publicly we were told, look, we dont even have the capability 2005 we dont have the capability to gather every single the data for every single phone call thats made by everybody in the United States. And if we did wed never do that. But anyway, that was one of the statements that was made that was either private or public. And that had some of our concerns. And the truth is i just couldnt imagine a judge that had been nominated by any president , liberal, conservative, i couldnt imagine, confirmed by the senate, obviously gone to law school that would sign an order saying, yeah, get every phone call made by every person everywhere. And i know the hearts of the people on both sides of the and that voted against spoke against Justin Amashs amendment. And i know this is one of those issues where we really i can feel it. I talked to people on both sides of the aisle in depth, in private, and i note we all want the same things here. We want to be safe but we want to protect our liberty. And it seems that those who have dealt directly with the intelligence agencies and information, classified information, theyve said, you know, we really do need this because you dont know how much trouble were really in if we dont have this. This stuff is critical. Hey need this information. Unfortunately it brings us back to other problems. One, for example, when you have open borders and you know there are people coming in the country that want to harm us, hurt us, destroy our way of life, take away our liberties, then you need to perhaps give up some liberty in order to have security. I dont want to give up liberty. I dont think we should have to. But when you have open borders, as open as ours are right now and people want to be secure and safe more than anything else, people are going to give up the very liberty that so many people gave their lives. R us to have john adams had that amazing quote, and i dont have it very, but in essence verbatim, but in essence, if people in future generations give up liberty then ill regret from heaven that i sacrificed so much for them to get it, have it. We owe it to those who went before us not to so easily give up our leb ritz. One of our hearings where we were liberties. One of our hearings where we were told, its only the metadata, we dont know who has what number, its the metadata so we can look for patterns. When you have the numbers and i asked the question, but our intelligence agencies are entitled or the n. S. A. , c. I. A. , f. B. I. , without a warrant youre obviously entitled to go to the public step to gather any information that any american could get. That means if any american can get the phone number, you know, what someones phone number is, then the c. I. A. , the n. S. A. , the f. B. I. , secret service, anybody can get that and then all you have to do is pull up those numbers and say, well, wonder who this person called and start looking. And for those and i want to say this as respectfully as possible. For those who say we can justify this because its probably saved us from some terrorist activities, dont and the hn adams thoughts of the founders and of those who gave their lives, their for turns, everything they had for us to have liberty when they said dont give up your liberty. And i would humbly submit that back in those days of the revolution, before the revolution, that it would have en very easy for king george to taken a step even beyond where he did where he could quarter soldiers in peoples homes without their permission. And its one of the things that frustrated our founders. That the king, without anyones permission, could send a soldier in to stay in their home or more than one. And thats why they wanted for assured that nobody, no government in america could ever do that kind of thing again. They could send a soldier just live in your house and watch everything, take notes of what youre doing. They suspected, gee, we dont have any hard evidence but we dont trust that guy, lets send a soldier to stay in that home, they could do that. And the soldier certainly hypothetically could have taken notes of every activity and then it would be easy for king george to say, i know youre concerned about me putting a soldier in every home that we are concerned about even though theres no evidence you violated the law or no evidence that youre a threat, but i want to point out to you that since and this is hypothetical but since we put a soldier in all of these homes to monitor everything going on in the home, we actually found a handful of terrorist plots by some of the revolutionaries. And weve been able to stop those, so we have actually saved american lives by having a soldier in every home of people we dont trust. And people could have said back at the time, wow, the king is really thinking about us and our safety because hes saved people from being killed in america because by having soldier in every home monitoring all this activity they were actually able to find some people that were trouble makers that would have harmed americans. So, yes, its worth it. Ok, king george. You keep monitoring anything anybody is doing even when you dont have probable cause. Theres some similarity here. When the government can put that big orwellian eye in your home and call it you call it your computer, your avenue, your network to the world, and they can watch everything you are doing in your home, they can watch every purchase you make. This Consumer Financial Protection Bureau that was created under Speaker Pelosi , well, they want to protect americans from egregious credit card companies. So they are gathering peoples Financial Information. And i go back to 2002 when a c. I. A. Attorney general at one of our judicial conferences said, gee, banks have all your information, your Financial Information, why shouldnt the government . And i was aghast and said, because the banks cant come to your home, bust down the door, throw you to the ground, put a boot on your back, and put you in handcuffs and drag you off. But the government can and does. So we got to be very careful to make sure the government does not overreach what they are allowed to do. So, yes, banks, third parties, may have Financial Information, but it does not mean the governments entitled to it. In fact, just the opposite. They are strictly forbidden to have that kind of information until speaker ba lowsys house and harry reid in the senate said well cret this Financial Bureau, and now we find out they are gathering Financial Information on people. Then we are assured you dont have to worry about obamacare even though we are hiring these navigators and we are not going to check their background, we are not going to make sure that they are not a problem or have a criminal record, but well make sure or try to that they finished high school, and they may need to review your medical records to see what kind of insurance, government mandated insurance policy you need. Wheres to this stop . The government upped obamacare will have every americans medical records. The Financial Bureau can have everybodys, they think, everybodys Financial Information. Thats the government having that. And then we find out that the n. S. A. Has gotten orders so they n get every single call that we have made to somebody. There is no specificity in an order like that. This has to stop. And i know that both sides of the aisle, this is at issue where we both have a kindred spirit. We want to protect peoples liberty, but some that are so lose to this issue have seen how much can be gleaned from peoples complete phone records and say, look, this is really dangerous. I know how dangerous it is. I have been sounding the alarm for years now. And the Muslim Brotherhood has profound influence in this country and in this administration and in this government. As we have already seen the largest demonstration in the history of the world in egypt, they figured it out. We dont want the radical islamists, the Muslim Brotherhood, running our country. Well, i dont want them running ours, either. But they are there. Secretary napolitano couldnt even tell me how many Muslim Brotherhood members she had giving her advice. She didnt even know. At least she said she didnt. This is a dangerous situation. We are in danger. There are people who want to take our liberty and destroy our country, but thats no reason for us to voluntarily give up all our liberty, giver up all our privacy give up all our privacy in the hope that maybe we can stop others from taking it from us. When you give up the liberty, you have given it up. We are supposed to have the government protecting us from these kind of intrusions, not demanding all the most private aspects of our lives. If somebody wants to disclose private information or private pictures about themselves, thats their business, but the government shouldnt be able to come in and get a picture of your most private information about your life and spread it around the government. And that is happening and there is so much more potential for it to continue to happen and to get worse. The patriot act seemed like a good thing if we could have adequate oversight and make sure that the kind of things we now found out are going on make sure they werent going on. Now we know they are. And i have been surprised, i talked to some of my liberal friends across the aisle that expressed concerns about giving the authority to the government to get this kind of information, and i was surprised some of them voted no against amashs amendment. But thats the thing when the n. S. A. , c. I. A. Put pressure on republicans, hey, you are conservative, we are with you. You got to help us have these tools. We are preventing people from being killed. You got to let us have all this private information about everybody. We promise, we are not abusing it. It persuades people on our side. Then on the other side, i talked to a friend that showed me a printout that he had been given and it said, well, no, i think exactly like you do. I dont want them having that much information, but see, louie, it says right here that, it says the law says that this can only be done, and it quoted, to protect against International Terrorism and foreign intelligence information. And i said, thats right. Thats what the law says, but thats not what they are doing. Really, i mean, i said they are right. Thats what the law allows, but they are going so far beyond that. This is something we need to work on together. So if there was ever an issue where the left and the right could come together, we want to secure peoples safety, security, but we cant keep giving up private liberty. Let those that want to tweet out their most intimate details, fine. Go for it. Be a fool. But for those who just want to be americans and live their private lives and be left alone, the government should not be watching everything they do through their computers, through their debit and credit card purchases and transactions, through every phone call they make. I thought i was being rather cute when i told my colleagues across the aisle who were very concerned that the government might get more than just with ation about contacts foreign terrorists. Because thats what we were told. Look, the only way we gather information about who you are calling, who is calling you, is known make a call to a foreign terrorist or you get a call from a known foreign terrorist, or you make a call to a member of a known terrorist organization, or you get a call from a member of a known terrorist organization. That comforted me. So i told my friends, publicly, look, if you are worried about having the government gather information on who you are calling, who is calling you, then when you call your foreign terrorist friends, use somebody elses phone. Nd it was amusing at the time. But now it turns out this government is gathering everybodys information and they are storing it and theyll have it and there is no indication they are ever going to get rid of it. When i was in college i was required to read the book the trial. I thought it was the silliest golf i ever read because it was one novel i ever read because it was one circumstantial crazy event after another, and the poor man never knew who was charging him, what he was charged with. I thought this is just somebody creating a nightmare scenario, but thank god we live in america and this could never happen here. Kafka e the seeds of a novel unfolding before us. And i hope and pray, mr. Speaker, that we will come together on both sides of the what, nd say, you know borders so only people that are legally coming in come in. Then once thats done, we can get an immigration bill done. And then because we are doing that, we dont have to keep giving up liberty to have security. And then lets clean up this law so that some judge who is completely forgotten what the constitution really means doesnt go off and sign an order to give the government every single phone call thats made to every single individual in and outside the United States, otherwise john adams will look from heaven and he will be regretting that he sacrificed so much for us to have the liberty that we are squandering. With that i yield back. The speaker pro tempore the entleman yield back. The chair lays before the house the following personal request. The clerk leaves of absence requested for mr. Horsford of nevada for today. The speaker pro tempore without objection, the request is granted. Under the speakers announced policy of january 3, 2013, the chair recognizes the gentleman from iowa, mr. King, for 30 minutes. Mr. King thank you, mr. Speaker, its my privilege to be recognized, and my privilege to follow the gentleman from texas and address to you as we close out this legislative week and a lot of the members are on their way to the airport or at the airport now going back to serve their constituents. Ill be there myself and trust mr. Goal rt will, too. I want to talk to come to the floor and talk about this country that we have, this civilization that we have, the foundations of our civilization and whats required to retain them and enhance them and move this country beyond the shining city on the hill. And to place to a place beyond there onward and upward. Ronl reagan described the shining city on the hill. He described it as america that is. America that was and america that is. We were always challenged by the dream, but he didnt actually articulate, that i recall, something beyond the shining city. Societies must progress and those that progress the most effectively and those that can be sustained the longest need to be built upon solid pillars. The shining city on the hill, standing true and strong on a Granite Ridge was built on a olid foundation. The foundation are the pillars of american exceptionalism. Those pillars are listed in the bill of rights, and you add to that Free Enterprise capitalism, judeochristian values, foundation of our culture which welcomes all religions, on top of that the dream that inspired legal immigrants to come to america. And that dream embodied within the vision of the image of the statue of liberty. Thats the american dream. Thats the American Country that we are. D thats the Foundation Upon which we have got to build our american future. But how did we get here . What was the reasons these pieces came together. How is it our Founding Fathers came to a conclusion we would have freedom of speech, religion, assembly, the right to keep and bear arms, freedom of the press, we would have Property Rights, Fourth Amendment rights against search and seizure, unreasonable search and seizure, we would not have to face any kind of jury but a jury of our peers and we would not suffer double jeopardy, and that justice would be blind and every person would stand before the law was treated equally. The lady justice, statue we see of lady justice, holding the scales of justice perfectly balanced, its almost always shown to us blindfolded bus justice is blind. Justice is not a feeling, justice is something that has to be delivered by the law. These are pillars of american exceptionalism. As are those rights that are not enumerated in the constitution, that devuffle to the states or the people respectively to the states or people. Those enumerated powers that we have are congress or there is some delegated to the presidency, executive branch, and we have the Judicial Branch of government. All of this is laid out as foundation that is have been although they have been altered to some degree over the years, we have adapted to those principles more often than we altered our constitutional principles because our Founding Fathers got it right. Where did that come from . How could it happen that these Founding Fathers could come together on what was an obscure place on the planet and get these ideas so well articulated that they could be the foundation of the greatest nation the world has seen . The strongest economy the world has seen . The most dominant culture and civilization the world has seen, furthest reach in our economy, influence strategicically. How did this happen . I would take you back, streak, to think a little bit about take you back, mr. Speaker, to think a little bit about the foundation of modern history. I take you back to he mosaic law, before the time of christ, when moses who looks down upon us right now, the only face that is looking directly at us from all of these faces of law providers in history, moses looks down over this chamber in fullfaced form, and hes looking back here and he sees, as we should see, in god we trust, our national motto. How did that come together, mr. Speaker . The foundation of that law, the way it was separated out through the tribes and the way the law and the way justice was delivered emerged out of mosaic law and appeared also in greek law. As the greeks, masterful people as they were, they were shaping the age of reason, the way mosaic law formed the age of reason and the age of reason ere i imagine socrates and plato and talked about those that did it in the west and young philosophers would go up to sock are a tees and challenge him socrates and challenge him with their information and socrates would take it apart. Because he was the top guy. And he informed others. As they were proud and prideful of their ability to reason and the culture at the time, they had to infuse mosaic law to uphold their rationale. And some of them as they voiced mosaic law were teased by other greeks, well, you got that from moses. My point is as civilization is progressing, mosaic law came down from the mountain, was handed to civilization, it emerged through the greek civilization as the greeks were developing their age of reason. And were talking about the foundation of western almost ion, and concurrently with that, roman law was emerging as well. Ll take you to the time of christ. He talked about the values of repentens and redemption that didnt exist in the form before then and that has gifted us. I talk about the importance of the law. Think about mosaic law coming down, being infused within the reeks, transferred also to the romans, roman law ruled over the world. As you remember, the high priest said to jesus, did you really say those things . Did you really preach those things . And jesus said to the high priest as the jews were watching, ask them. They were there. They can tell you. That was, mr. Speaker, the assertion by jesus that he had a right to face his accusers. That principle remains today in our law that we have a right to face our accusers. And when he said ask them, they were there, they can tell you, hes facing his accusers and demanding they testify against him rather than make allegations behind his back. And what happened when jesus said that, they believed and the high priest believed that jesus answer was inns atlanta and the guard insulant and the guard struck jesus. If i speak wrongly you must prove the wrong. If i speak rightly, why do you punish me . He asserted his right to be innocent until Proven Guilty before a roman court. Those two principles remain today in our law, a right to face your accuser, innocent until profpble guilty, you face that Proven Guilty, you face that jury of your peer. You need a quick and speedy trial. They didnt have that then. The punishment came quickly whether right or wrong. This foundation of law was wrapped up in roman law and spread across western europe as they occupied germany, england, today, on into ireland. And when the dark ages came, sacked in 410 a. D. , we saw civilization tumble and crumble and we saw the heathens break down anything that represented the old culture. Anything that represented real civilization. And while that was going on, they were tearing buildings into rubble, they were burning anything that was written documents. While that was going on, the priests and let me say the descendents of the disciples of christ began to gather up any paper and documents they could get their hands on. Some went to rome to be secured and replicated by the monks and the scribes there. A lot went to ireland, an island off of ireland where the mornings and the scribes rep monks and the scribes replicated those documents there. That was the part of the relearning of a civilization, a civilization that lived for centuries, having lost the ability to reason. That age of reason that they were so proud of in the time of plato and rates, astopple, didnt leave a record of rationale and didnt develop technology, science or thought. And at a certain time this information that was preserved in the documents of the classics, both biblical and religious information and any information that the monks and scribes got their hands on, they analyzed it and studied it and they took a continent and taught that continent how to think. As the church emerged from rome and from st. Patricks side of this thing out of ireland, they built monasteries across the continent and began to educate the information they preserved primarily from the roman but also the greek era and they reeducated an entire civilization and recreated a civilization based on judeochristian values, the age of reason, and that reason that tied the values of faith together with the values that will allow for science to be developed. And that brings us to that year. Lets say the years as emerging from the middle ages and Martin Luther then step onto the scene in the 16th century and brought us on top of that the reformation period where he made the point that cast across the globe that you can honor god in a lot of ways but you can do so. A mother changing a babys than honors god more 1,000 wrote prayers that you dont give meaning from your heart into. So the protestant work ethic got added to the values together and the competition between the protestant and the Catholic Church within christianity ended up it was rough and it was brutal but the effect on our civilization and society has been good because the competition that drove from that made us all better. And each religion drew from the other. By the way, the Eastern Church was separated when the turks sacked constantinople and so the eastern orthodox and western orthodox were tied together culturally, historically, were tied together by our common humanity and belief in and this is a belief. Mponent as we emerge into the well, as we had emerged into the age of discovery, meaning Christopher Columbus and the explorers that came over here to the western hemisphere, that component as well as a little bit later the dawn of the industrial revolution. Think about where we are here in america. Were the recipients of some of the wisest, most analytical people that the world has ever produced, our Founding Fathers, they are a product of a culture and civilization that believed in adam smiths Free Enterprise and the rights to property and they believed they were free men, that they were free. In fact, me said so in the declaration of independence when jefferson wrote in the declaration a prince who exhibits the characteristics of a tyrant is unfit to be a ruler of a free people. A free people. They saw themselves as a free people before the declaration. They didnt become necessarily free people as a product of, although they certainly had to earn it. They declared their freedom from england, but they saw themselves as free people before they issued the declaration of independence. But that brings us now to july 4, 1776. Brought this history around for a couple thousand years or a little bit more. More than 2,000 years. And on this continent now we have the wisdom of the Founding Fathers. I believe they were inspired by god and that it was by divine guidance that the declaration was written. It arrived freedom of speech, religion, the press and assembly, the right to keep and bear arms, the judicial side of it, the Property Rights in the fifth amendment, the power down to the people or the states. All of this landed on a continent with unlimited Natural Resources so we believed at the time. All of these rights, Free Enterprise, strong judeochristian values, the reason people came here, limited resources, the concept of manifest destiny, now, who could create a giant petri dish thats so robust that it could settle a continent in the blink of an historical eye and leave the foundation for the growth of population and the image and the inspiration of faith and freedom, who could do that . Not man. But the entity that shaped their movements and their thoughts. So here we are the recipients, god given liberty, defined in the declaration, should be inarguable, shouldnt be challengeable. I think it is. We are a nation that cannot be reverse engineered and come up with a better result. We are a nation that has components of american exceptionalism, pillar after pillar of american exceptionalism, none of which can we pull out from underneath the edifice of this shining city on the hill and expect it would not collapse. Yes, it would. What is our charge here . Its not as hard as the charge of our Founding Fathers. Its not as hard as those that picked up their muskets and marched into the red coats muskets in the revolution. Its not as hard as the blue and the gray that clashed all over the battlefields here in this country and put an end to slavery and reunified this country. Its not as hard as the doe boy that is marched off to doughboys that marched off to war. Its not as hard as the 16 million americans who put on uniforms to defend our country in the second world war. Its not as hard for us as the 450,000 who gave their lives during that war. Its not as hard, either, as those who marched off to korea and honored down here at their memorial. The memorial that says on the slab in front of them, our nation honors the men and women who answered the call to defend a country they never knew and a people they never met. None of what we are charged with right now is that hard. And yet some despair and some think that we can create this new america that is not tied to the pillars of american exceptionalism. Can sacrifice some of those principles and well still be a country ok because we have some political pressure that says we should sacrifice this principle or choose some pieces out of this marble pillar of american exceptionalism. Imagine what it would be like. What if this congress, and this culture which directs this congress, what if we decided, youre going to have limited speech, certain things you cant say, and well give you the list of words you cant utter because if you do that, you are going to be violating somebodys sense of political correctness. What if we said you can assemble but we are going to diminish your right to assemble because sometimes we disagree with what comes out of those meetings . The greeks did that. They had meetings in their city states and they would remember the greek blackball system that they had. The demagogues would emerge. People that could step up before the masses in greece and the city states and issue a speech that was rhetoricically so inspiring that the greeks marched off in what turned out to be the wrong direction. What would they do . They would label them a demagogue, bring them before the city state and then they would excoriate him and then they would have a vote. And its like the greek system today. Two gords, two marbles, one black, one red, they called them balls, of course. As each of the greeks walked through they would have i said red, white and black, they would drop their voting ball in one gord and drop their disard ball in another gord. If the demagogue got three blackballs he was banished from seven years. Thats how they muzzled the people that led them in the wrong direction with emotional rhetoric. But can you imagine if we did that . If america would banish people for giving terlands a speech that was disagreed with by three people, thats all it took, three, they were restrained because they didnt want to be the next one banished, but that was the system. We are not going to limit freedom of speech in this country. We are not going to limit freedom of assembly. We are not going to say you cant get together and talk about these things because we know that an open Public Discourse and dialogue, what emerges from that are, we believe in this reason that we have inherited from the greeks an other civilizations, that what will emerge is the most logical rational policy. Thats what im advocating for, mr. Speaker. I want the most logical, rational policy. And i think we need a policy thats right for america. I have an obligation to preserve, protect, and defend the constitution of the United States and represent my constituents and represent my state and represent my country. And all of those things should be compatible with each other, and i believe they are. And i have not found myself in a conflict here between them. So i suggest that we have open dialogue, we have open debate. I challenge this civilization to be reasonable, have reason, be analytical, be a critical thinker. We send our kids off to school and sometimes they are just taught a mantra, but they are not taught to take ideas apart and understand the components of them and put them back together. I have just taken america apart and described some of its essential components, history apart, and put it back together, mr. Speaker, and hopefully informed this body of some of the principle reasons why america is such a great nation. We are a great nation because we have godgiven liberty. We would not be a great nation if we didnt exercise those godgiven liberties. If we dont have access to those rights, if we dont put our positions out there in front of the public and challenge the people in this country to analyze those alternatives, what if we went down one path . What if some leader from on high, lets just say king george, not prince george, what if we decided to go down this path and no one shall discuss anything outside this line i described for you. What kind of a country would we be . Would we believe that one mortal individual can chart a path for this country superior to the collective wisdom of 316 Million People . I dont think so, mr. Speaker. I dont think thinking americans will, either. But i know that this countrys full of emotionalism, and as i watched their reactions to the George Zimmerman trial and verdict, i saw a lot of people who simply denied the facts that had been proven in law. And seemed to be incapable of considering anything that didnt concur with their conclusion that they had drawn before they saw the facts. Now, i engage in this debate. I challenge people to debate with me because i believe one of two things. If i cant sustain myself in debate i need to get more information. I need to get better informed, or could it be that im wrong . Only two alternatives can come from not being able to sustain yourself in a debate. Ill go back and get all the information i can get, but ill also reconsider. And anybody should. Thats why i challenge people to debate. Ill take it up, and well see who can stains themselves. We may not get this resolved in one discussion. In fact, in this congress its been a very rare thing over the 10plus years i have been here to see anybody stand up and admit, i was was wrong. What you said changes my position. What i learned changes my position. No, there are too many egos involved in this congress for that to happen off. It will have a little bit privately. It will happen incrementally, it doesnt happen publicly unless there is leverage brought to bear. Heres my point, mr. Speaker, and that is this. Our southern border is porous. Its not as porous as it was seven or eight years ago. Mainly because the economy has grown in mexico at about twice the rate that its grown in the United States over the last 4 1 2 or five years. Pressure ve as much on our border, but i can tell you this. 80 to 90 of the Illegal Drugs consumed in america come from or through mexico. I can tell you that in mexico they are recruiting kids to be drug smugglers. Between the ages of 11 and 18 they have arrested and i believe incarcerated and the number of convictions that actual that actually may be the number of convictions, its at least this, over 800 per year over the last couple years at that ratio of those who are kids who are smuggling drugs into the United States. We pick up some on our side of the border, that adds to that number. The ones we catch. Many get away. Every night some come across the Border Smuggling drugs across the border. Increasingly the higher value drugs, heroin, methamphetamine, cocaine in some form or another, are being strapped to the body sometimes of young girls, teenage girls. The media is replete with this. Anybody that reads the paper should know, especially those that live on the border, should know that there are many, many young people coming across the border unlawfully who are smuggling drugs into the United States. They should also know that now the drug cartels, and i mean specifically the mexican drug cartels, have taken over Drug Distribution and most of the major cities in america, i think intel will tell you every major city in america, and the numbers that i have seen go there a little over 200 cities in the country to 2000. I dont know what population that dials it down to. I havent seen the map. It should be appalling to a country and civilization to see thats taking place. When you understand that according to the Drug Enforcement agency of every chain of illegal Drug Distribution we have in the country, they will tell you at least privately as they have to me on multiple occasions, at least one link are illegal aliens smuggling drugs into the United States. Its important that we know that will as a congress, as a country, as a civilization. If we deny those facts, if we deny the information that comes obama t of the administration that certainly supports those, if you deny the information that comes out through the major media thats there, if you deny what we are told by our Law Enforcement officers on the border of the United States that are continually interdicting drugs at about the same rate they did sews six or seven, eight years ago when the population of illegal was flowing over the border at a faster rate than today, the Illegal Drugs come across the border roughly similar to that time. That said, there is still high demand in the United States. High demant means drugs are likely to come in. If we are enforcing our borders and tightening down security, the price of drugs should go up. If you look at the price of drugs, i think you are going to find we havent been very effective in interdicting drugs coming across our southern border. Part of that is because they find new ways to smuggle and some are because kids are being used to smuggle drugs into the United States. Thats appalling to me. The depth across the arizona border, its still there. This debate taking place now in the middle of the summer is going to end up with more people being found out there own the desert in the brush who have lost their lives trying to get into the United States of america. We need a secure border. We need to build a fence, wall, two r sense so we have patrolling zones. We need to use our boots on the ground in the most effective way possible. No nation should have an open borders policy, no nation should have a blind eye policy towards the enforcement of the laws. No nation can long remember remain a great nation if they decide to sacrifice the rule of law on the altar of political expediency. No nation like the United States ever america can tain to grow and be a vo can continue to grow and be a strong nation if we are going to judge people because they disagree with our agenda rather than the content of their statement. We have to be critical thinkers. We have to be analytical. We should understand facts from emotion. Lets pull together, lets understand that we do have compassion. We do have compassion for every human person deserves dignity. We need to treat them with warmth, that love as the American People always have, korean war veterans did when they gave themselves for a country they never knew and a people they never met, but we must not sacrifice the rule of law on the altar of political expediency. With that, mr. Speaker, i yield back the balance of my time. The speaker pro tempore the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. Does the gentleman have a motion . Mr. King mr. Speaker, i move the house do now adjourn. The speaker pro tempore the question is on the motion to adjourn. So many as are in favor say aye. Those opposed, no. The ayes have it. The motion is adopted. Accordingly the house stands adjourned until 10 00 a. M. Tomorrow. Coal ash, which is commonly used in cement and asphalt and also post Health Concerns when not properly stored and managed. The bill next heads to the senate. The house returns onto returns on tuesday. Aon the agenda, abe compromise bill approved by the senate yesterday by vote of 81 18. Watch the house when numbers return on tuesday for speeches and legislative work. Earlier today, nancy pelosi held her weekly briefing. She spoke about yesterdays vote, where the house narrowly blocked an amendment by a michigan representative that would have limited the nsas phone and Data Collection program. We will show you her briefing first and in the briefing by House Speaker john boehner. Good morning. How are you . Gaverday, president obama an address to the nation in which he laid out and put forth ideas to grow our economy, upholding the principles shared by House Democrats that you grow the economy from the middle out rather than the top down. This was accomplished with a budget that promotes growth with good paying jobs, invest in buildsion, our future, the infrastructure of america, expands the economy and responsibly reduces the deficit. Investments in job creation, education, secure retirement, quality affordable healthcare are the core Building Blocks of middleclass security. Sharp contrasts the presence speech was compared to what was supposed to happen today in the committee. The republicans put forth a bill that would cut 32 billion, 22 out of these core Building Blocks of the middle class area republicans had to pull the bill. Some of us think because it was in such sharp contrast to the vision the president laid out yesterday and the gloom they would be presenting. Democrats stood ready to fight. They had 40 amendments put forlready to address example, they take aliens of dollars out of the National Institutes of health. Every family, everyone of you is one phone call, one diagnosis diagnosis, one accident away from needing the institute of health. The answer to our prayers, cut grade not only health and well being, but also cut investments and innovations to keep america number one. Simply building upon the gloom of the ryan budget, which also vouch arises medicare. Seniors pay more. As the president said, one step we can take to advance the economy and the middle class is to raise the minimum wage. As those of you who keep track of these things, yesterday was the fouryear anniversary since the last increase in the minimum wage. We have put forth legislation to rate to raise the min wage and keep sure that it make sure that it keeps pace with the cost of living. Securing a living wage is part of our agenda i talk to you womenlast week. When succeed, it america succeeds, and agenda for women and families. It is about valuing work, pay equity, and lifting the minimum wage is one part of that. T is about paid leave we are now observing the 20th anniversary of the implementation of the family medical leave. 100 million families have availed themselves of that opportunity. , atwe need it to be paid least some piece of it to be paid so that women can have balance between work and home. Of that is affordable, accessible childcare. When children can learn, parents can earn. This is good for the family in the country. The agenda unleashes the power of women in our economy in every aspect whether its the protection of our country and National Security, economic security, the education of our chosen, whether it is quality Affordable Care or whether it is mom staying home as i did when my children were growing up i am in all of these young women in congress on the work lazy balance work and family. Our agenda is about the future of americas emilys, the growth of americas economy, because we know when the women succeed, america succeeds. As we approach the district work, i look forward to the debate on the debt limit that will transpire when we come back in the fall. Democrats are committed to working in a bipartisan way to address the challenges we face and to grow the economy. We extend a hand of friendship to try to Work Together to resolve this. There are certain lines we will not cross. We will not destroy jobs, which is what the ryan budget does. We will not harm our Senior Citizens by cutting medicare and Social Security. We will not put Insurance Companies back in charge of healthcare while ending critical Patient Protection in the Affordable Care act. The is the standard American People want us to meet. But there is plenty of room to find Common Ground. 204 days since the start of the 113th congress, still no jobs bill. 124 days, four months since the Senate Passed a budget bill, still no budget. The republicans never intend to enact solutions for our country. When it comes to job creation, finding results never doesnt work for us. We have got to insist and over the break, we will be talking to the American People about how we can Work Together in a bipartisan way to create jobs to take us into the future as we responsibly reduce the deficit. Any questions . Can you explain why you voted against the plan yesterday . When this came up for reauthorization, do you see any better balance between privacy and security . I did not vote with the patriot act when it aim up. I had my problems with sex and with section 215. I dont want anybody to misunderstand the vote against the amendment yesterday. Im putting together a letter signed by members who voted on both sides of the issue. We voted on both sides of that resolution, but we Stay Together in our concerns about how the mega Data Collection is i recently set a letter to the privacy and Civil Liberties board in which i talk about the scope of the definition of relevant to National Security. Hasressman conyers legislation that addresses that fromhe transparency going 215 now to the fisa bill. Transparency in terms of how the court works and that addresses some of the concerns. You might recall, had a long , candid, ongoing conversation with the Intelligence Community about how congress is informed and who knows what in the aggregate over what time and i said at the time, no matter who is resident, it is important to recognize all of that information. The ownership of logs to the American People and we had to make decisions about it at know more about it. Apart from the original thrust of your question, one thing we want to know is how on earth could there be such exposure at the nsa to so much information thats important to our National Security and a sources and methods in addition to priorities. [inaudible] with all of these things, we findo come together and Common Ground. Our task force of Seven Members which is now four and three, even when the other republican was on there, he contributed in a positive way to what will be the product which we hope to see in a week or two. I think they are coming down to freezing the design on it and releasing that information. The American People have expressed in overwhelming numbers their support for a path to citizenship and the polling we are seeing is consistent with what we have been saying all along, that comparing the senate bill with a path to legalization which leads to citizenship to a bill that would not do that, the disparity is two or 321. Tell one. Hree im sure americans will be talking to members of congress and we are proud of the coalition working on this. It has nothing to do with democrats and republicans. It is totally nonpartisan. The Law Enforcement people who have come in that should have come and spoken to us, the Business Community, in many of its manifestations, whether its the chamber of commerce or the hightech community or whatever the Business Community has come,he state allegation from texas the industrywide delegations from all over the country in support of comprehensive Immigration Reform and then the bible,ding up to the religious community. They have been telling me that for years and they have manifested my commitment and advocacy for an immigration bill. I would hope as we go forward we would heed the words of president bush, which he stated last week, that as we go forward, we have a beneficent attitude toward the people who are caught in this Immigration Reform debate. Sometimes we have seen this with these big issues where august, it generates a lot of attention. We have to find a way we have to find a way and the speaker has talked about bringing bills together, what ever it is, whatever the path is, we have to find a path to go to conference and come up with a bill the president will sign we can all support in a ,ipartisan way and recognize as we said before, there are some poison pills, but they are not lethal. We can live with that and im optimistic because it has to happen. We cannot let this language area i think it will be a positive time for us. Im curious about your take on former congressman wieners latest transgressions, having repeated the same action that occurred for his resignation. Im thinking of you as a kind of social issue kind of guy here. We are legislators, but i will take your question. I think i have spoken and acted in terms of Anthony Weiner and in terms of what he was in the congress of the United States. And the case of maher filner, they have both admitted they need therapy. I think that therapy is better accomplished in private. [inaudible] thats up to the people in new york. Let me be very clear the conduct of some of these people we are talking about here is reprehensible. It is this respectful of women stunningis really about it is they dont even realize it. They dont have a clue. If they are clueless, get a clue. If they need therapy, do it in private. It looks like the house will vote on student loan packages. The publicans have been saying this is their bill and they are proud of it. I wonder if you think they deserve credit for bringing this to the floor, especially because a lot of democrats will be voting against it. I dont know about that because they may bring it as a suspension, so it will require a large number of democrats to vote for it. I believe the bill is farsed by the Senate Superior to what happened in the house. If they want to take credit for calling attention to the shortcomings of the bill corrected in the senate, give them credit for that. But this is a far superior bill. Isn it comes back here, it not the bill we would have written, but it is a bill that will have democrats for and against. Our Ranking Member, george miller, and the leader in house on this subject, joe courtney,ave both advised a yes vote recognizing it is a vast improvement over what the republicans in the house passed and the best we can do at this time, and we would hope we could revisit the bill before too long. What we have here is a situation where the republicans are insisting that in order to do more for the students and the families, republicans are insisting they pay for it. While they are not heaping mountains of debt on future generations so we cant invest in nutrition and education and the rest because we have two cut that. We are instead heaping mountains of personal debt on these young people by saying if we were to do more, we would have to pay for it and its just not right. But it is much better than what what theposed. House proposed. You talked about the president s speeches, but republicans have been highly critical that the president doesnt seem to be doing much in terms of reaching out. They are leaving town and making political speeches. President nk the needs to get more actively involved in negotiations with Congressional Republicans . Lex it is interesting because in get merience dont wrong, i was very low on the totem pole, but as i am served the president and becoming part of the leadership over time, this resident has been so respectful of the ideas of the offices of the Republican Leadership and republican members. If anything, he has taken criticism from his own party for being overly accommodating with no reward. They have rejected his overtures in and then say he doesnt Pay Attention to us. This is a false claim area im excited about the this is a false claim. Im excited about the president going out communicating with the American People. You heard me say over and over that lincoln said public sentiment is everything. Hopefully the initiatives and priorities the president puts forth will resonate with the American People and hopefully that message will come back individually to members of congress. Nothing is more eloquent to members of congress than the voices of his or her own to situations. It is important for the president to be out there and im glad its a simple message about jobs, about the education our children children, the health of our people. Bread and butter, Kitchen Table that the American People need results and progress on. Thats a false claim that the president has not tried to work with them. I have said to him over and busy to be in these meetings were over and over again you reach out to them. You must be busier than i am, but nonetheless, you are willing to take the time in the hope, in the face of not much by way of results, that they will eventually say ok, lets find some Common Ground. President bush did that. President bush senior did that, and its always a respect for the role we all play as representatives of our constituents, as leaders, and our hearty as leaders in the congress. I think it is great. I know why they dont want him to go out there, because it establishes the contrast. Why would the president be making a pitch on something that should be so obvious . Is there anything partisan about good jobs and education and Retirement Security . No. But if you see the Budget Priorities of the republicans, and you see for example what was in the labor, health and Human Services bill and education bill, you see a stark contrast not only between the president and republicans in the house, but between the American People and republicans in the house. And by the way, between republicans out there and republicans in the house. Knowrepublicans out there we have to invest in education to be number one. That we have to create good paying jobs if we are going to grow the middle class. And the list goes on. [inaudible] there is this idea of changing the inflation adjustment. Im wondering if you would consider that a benefit cut and unacceptable to democrats . If you dont, would it not also be a tax increase because of the. I cpi would have would rather back up from your question and say i dont think Social Security should be on the table in the budget talks. If they want another table where we talk about sustainability for Social Security and sustainability for medicare, lets do that so we can have them be, serve the purpose there rather than wither on the vine as republicans socialrefer area saving security rather than saying it has no place in society and we want to privatize it. We say these are pillars of economic and Health Security for americas families. How do we strengthen them and prolong their stability and sovereignty . They are separate arguments from what we do about the budget, and thats what i will say about that. , i will have today that letter ready on the nsa. We need a day or two to get the signatures, but when we do, you will be the first to know. Thank you all very much. What are you turning into . Anthony weiner and the color of your close . [laughter] thank you all. [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions Copyright National cable satellite corp. 2013] House Republicans are committed to fixing the broken immigration system. We are working on a commonsense, stepbystep approach to make sure the American People have confidence we are addressing these issues openly and honestly. Our focus is on getting the policy right, so we fix our immigration system once and for all and help our economy grow. I want to be clear there is no place in this bait for hateful or ignorant comments from elected officials. ,arlier this week representatives tv cain made comments that were i think deeply offensive and wrong. Steve king. Does not reflect the values of the American People or the Republican Party. We need to do our work in a constructive and open way. As i have said many times, we can disagree without being disagreeable. Senate democrats finally joined republicans in passing a permanent marketbased solution on Student Loans. This bipartisan victory is a victory for students and for our economy. It is on a path entirely consistent with the House Republican bill that passed in may. I would like to thank chairman klein and representative Virginia Foxx for their work on this issue and the Bipartisan Group of senators who are members worked with to come to this agreement. As for the Democratic Leaders in the senate, all i can say is what took you so long . The president pivoted this week to jobs as he has been known to do on occasion. Under the present leadership, our country has fallen into the new normal of slow growth, high unemployment and stagnant wages. I think it is unacceptable. Be the speech turned out to all sizzle and no steak. Thats assuming there is any sizzle left after he has reheated this thing so many times area i hope that going forward, he will learn from his experience on Student Loans and other issues where he would focus more on those issues where we can find Common Ground. Been republicans have focused on Economic Growth and jobs since day one. The president says he wants our ideas and here they are. We have been at it since day one. We welcome any opportunity to work with the president on an acting things that will our economy moving again. We want to expand american energy, simple flyer tax code, and fix a broken government. If the president wants a better bargain, i think its a pretty good place to start. These are commonsense ideas where there is consensus in the president works with us to find Common Ground like he did on Student Loans, we can make real progress. I hope you will reach out and continue to work with us. Yesterday was the 15th two Capitol Hill Police officers dying [inaudible] what do you think of the criticism after that incident ,hat this room here got built that there is no urgency among lawmakers to do anything on gun violence. You guys work in the safest Office Building in the country. Gunbviously, the issue of violence has been difficult to read if you look at all the major incidents where you have this type of gun violence, you will find the perpetrator had a history of mental illness. The question is how do we keep guns out of the hands of those who should not have them . I think our committees have done a number of hearings and they will continue to work on this because it is really the link how do we do this as we do these background checks . [inaudible] isnt that sort of language and those sort of sentiments among certain members of congress, is that indicative of the challenge of trying to pass any sort of Immigration Reform bill . Our committees are doing their work. We will go through this in a commonsense, stepbystep way. We dont need to make this job more difficult. We have a broken system. A broken Legal Immigration system. Who arem with those here undocumented, that ought to be dealt with as well. It does make it more difficult, but im going to continue to work with members who want to get to a solution as opposed to those who want to do nothing. [inaudible] of course. Is doing something narrowly tailored, is that something you would call broken . There are a number of things that need to be fixed with our broken immigration system. 40 of those without documents came here legally. How do we fix the system so that it is more fair and that we can enforce . Since your hair is combed and nice, i will call on you. He shaved and have socks on. [inaudible] that would be a bit of an overstatement. [laughter] there seems to be in the senate this rehashing of possibly the ground bargain the grand bargain to coincide with the limit, talking about having meetings with president obama. Would you open yourself up to allowing one meeting with president obama regarding the debt ceiling . I have made it clear that its time for congress to do its work. Im happy to work with the president or anyone else thats interested in fixing a spending problem that has grown entirely out of control. Nearly 17 trillion worth of debt. Another 700 billion or 8 billion worth of debt. Weve spent what weve brought in in the last 55 years. I hope somebody is actually willing to talk about it, but i think moving this through regular order is the right way to do it. I think i have made that pretty clear. Since you do not have to vote and dont usually vote, why did you vote on the nsa. Mendment sponsored by amash because i was opposed to it. Why so opposed that you felt you wanted to go on the record . Do you feel any changes would be appropriate when the patriot act is reauthorized . I voted because these nsa programs have helped keep americans safe area in my view, there are ample safeguards to protect the privacy of the American People. I know how these programs have worked. I know how they have work to help protect the American People and i felt very strongly about it. I also felt very strongly that congress couldnt just avoid the debate. Members wanted to have this debate. I believe in a more open process and i wanted the house to have this debate. Did, the amendment was defeated, im proud of my colleagues who stood up for what i think they believed was a program that is working to help protect the American People. Mr. Kingseel comments are so offensive that be something to remove him from the Judiciary Committee question mark i think i have made myself very clear. Do you think it would be productive in the debt ceiling or continuing resolution to try to get the president to revisit funding or revisit obamacare . Isobamacare in my view driving up the cost of Health Insurance, its denying people access to quality care, and it is tilling jobs in america. 39 or 40hy we voted times two defund or repeal obamacare. I would remind you that a president has signed seven changes to obamacare into law that would never have happened if it had not been for our continued efforts to defund this and repeal it. As we get into the fall, we will continue to point out what i think are big flaws in the system. How can you provide subsidies to these Health Exchanges without verifying peoples income . Our job is to protect the American People and spend their tax payer money wisely. I think it is wide open. Just one of a number of issues i expect we will continue to work on as we do everything we can to make sure this doesnt really go into effect. Possiblythat include attempting to defund it . We will continue to do everything we can to defund it, repeal it, and make sure the American People are not put through this or if experience. Through this terrific experience. One of the upcoming continuing resolutions that includes an amendment to the mandate of obamacare. Do you agree with the remarks that the individual mandate should be [indiscernible] no decision has been made about how we are going to deal with the cr. Are you ruling out the cr . Senator leahy and others in the house are saying its now or never to block funding for obamacare. We have not made any decisions about how were are going to deal with it. Thank you all. The house hasnt gaveled out, but the work continues. As we look at the capital, the senate is in, a subcommittee holding a meeting on the nations water infrastructure. An epa survey estimates water Delivery Systems will need upgrades over the next two decades totaling 384 billion. That hearing is live now over on cspan3. Earlier, the vice chairman of the subcommittee on health talked about the implementation on the Health Care Law and what lies ahead for as a lost culture at six pages go into effect in october. Health insurance exchanges go into effect in october. I will never forget 2009, when everything sort of kicked out in my sleepy town halls in denton, texas, i attracted two dozen people in it that it was a good people. What we had 2000 show up. Aird to move it from the conditioned space into the parking lot at 100 10 degrees because there simply wasnt room for everyone who showed up. I didnt want the picture on the 6 00 news to be people pounding on the doors saying listen to us. We went to the parking lot and talked for hours. I dont know that it will be that level, particularly in texas, people are going to be mad about the irs, immigration, matt about any number of things. This will probably be fairly low down on the list. But theres no question therell be some discussion about this. We will likely absorb a lot of criticism for not enthusiastically embracing the Affordable Care act, but it has been well advertised. I was a skeptic from day one. The other thing thats going to come up act in texas is the issue of funding. Youve got the end of the fiscal year coming up on september 30. Exchanges start the next day. There is a nexus its going to be important. Then we have the incredible budget battle sometime before the end of the year with the federal debt limit. And how that is going to interplay in this. And governor perry is concerned. Do i trust the federal government to do everything they say they are going to with their check book . I do not. But with the sequester, what if i start this and theres no partner with me at the end of next year and im standing on my own . The funding questions are going to be some of the more heated ones. You are in the house, you control the purse strings, why dont you shut this thing down . Thats likely to be the question i will get. But me ask one other quick lessons. One other quick question. It passed in the subcommittee on a voice vote last week and it will pass the full committee next week. At some point, we will likely be wrapped up into the bigger budget battle. The important thing about sgr was it that includes the assets. We got input from providers and patients for a year and a half or two years. Republicans and democrats worked well into the night for months on this. The important thing was to get the policy right and we will worry about the pay for that later date. We were able to coalesce around policy. , the sgrn for congress was one of the issues that was in solvable. No one is going to fix it. We are going to fix it. All of that Panel Discussion on Health Insurance exchanges is coming up at about 3 40 eastern on cspan. House today passed a bill to limit the Environmental Protection agencys authority to regulate coal ash, giving states more control over the management of the coal combustion byproduct. The house is back on tuesday, working on a bill to Fund Transportation and housing programs. Also on the agenda is a bipartisan compromise bill addressing the doubling of student Loan Interest rates. The latest edition was approved by the senate yesterday. Before gaveling out this afternoon, steny hoyer and republican leader eric cantor talked about the ongoing negotiations over funding the federal government through the end of the fiscal year on september 30th. House and Senate Republicans threatened to block any government funding that includes money for the abomination of the healthcare law. The two leaders spoke on the house floor for about 45 minutes. On friday, the house will meet at 9 00 a. M. For legislative business. The last votes of the week are expected no later than 3 p. M. The house will consider number bills under suspension of the rules, a complete list of which will be announced by the of business tomorrow. Yesterday, the senate acted on a student loan bill that house passed last month. I expect the house to deal with it probably next week. In addition, i expect to consider mr. Speaker, the house is not in order. The gentleman is correct. The house is not in order. These take your conversations off the floor. Thank you, mr. Speaker. The fiscal consider year 2014 transportation, housing and urban Development Appropriations act authored i representative tom latham. Members are advised to house will begin consideration of this bill on tuesday afternoon and should be prepared to offer amendments that that appropriate time. Members are further advised that the 6 30 p. M. Vote series that they could be longer than normal. For the remainder of the week, mr. Speaker, the house will consider number of bills to restrain runaway government and reempower our citizens. To stop government abuse and protect the middle class, we will bring in a number of bipartisan bills to the floor under suspension of the rules on wednesday. Following that, we will debate to bills for certain to rules focused on stopping government abuse and protecting the middle class. 367, sponsored by representative todd young, requires congressional approval of regulations that cost over 100 million. Thesecond, hr 2009, 2 keep irs off your health care act, by representative tom price, since the irs from implementing any portion of obamacare. When federal bureaucrats abuse their power and waste tax dollars, liberty is eroded, the economy is slowed, and the rule of law is betrayed. Thank you, i yield back. I thank the gentleman for his information. , mr. t see on the schedule speaker, that we are going to budget conference at least with no notice from the majority leader on that fact. Mr. Speaker, as you know, we are facing a number of critical deadlines. It has been 125 days since the house passed a budget and 100 23 days since the Senate Passed a budget. On issue after issue, our republican colleagues, mr. Speaker, have passed bills and refused to negotiate. Mr. Speaker, it is passed time for action. We should go to conference and reach agreement. I would urge my friend, mr. Majority leader, that mr. Speaker, to go to conference. One of his colleagues from virginia said this i am probably on record about this. I believe we need to go to conference. Speaking of the budget. Iis number went on to say have listened carefully to the argument that we should not go to conference and frankly i do not wind it compelling. Mr. Speaker, that was l fromentative scott ridge virginia. Does the gentleman expect we will go to conference at all on the budget . And i yield to my friend. Mr. Speaker, i thank the gentleman for his tenacity as this is a weekly discussion between he and me. Im delighted to respond and say to the gentleman, mr. Speaker, that it is something we should commit ourselves to working out. But as the gentleman knows, the position of the majority is we dont want to enter into discussions if the prerequisite is you have to raise taxes. The gentleman has heard me every week on this issue in that we believe strongly you fix the problem of overspending, you reform programs needing reform to address unfunded liabilities first. Isn if the gentleman insistent that taxpayers need to pay more of their hardearned dollars into washington, that discussion perhaps it is appropriate. But as a prerequisite to entering budget talks that we agree to raise taxes is not something i think the American People want this body to engage in. I yield back. I thank the gentleman for his comments. , the gentlemans premise is absolutely incorrect and the American People ought to know that. The senate has voted to go to conference. Excuse me, they havent voted to go to congress because republican members of the United States senate will not bow to go to conference. There was nothing in that motion that said it was a prerequisite that the house agreed to anything, mr. Speaker. Nothing. My friend, the majority leader, has said repeatedly we have a prerequisite. We have a difference of opinion. Thats what democracy is about. There is no prerequisite. There is no precondition. There is no condition preceding this to going to conference. The senate couldnt make us agree. Thats what conferences are about, mr. Speaker. They are about coming together and understanding there are differences. There will be no need for a conference if if there were not differences. There are differences. We are 91 billion apart on our budgets. We are 14 days away from the end of this the school year in terms to gethis fiscal year to a compromise, to get to a number, to get to some understanding of how we are going to ensure Government Operations continue. There is no prerequisite. There is no precondition. I dont know where that comes from, mr. Speaker. Ive heard a lot. I have no idea where it comes from. Nothing the senate does can force this body, republicans or democrats, to do something. What they have asked is come to the table and talk. There has been a refusal to do that, mr. Speaker. And it is bad for the country. A 91 billion difference between us on the budget has to be resolved somehow, someway. The way democracies do it and the way the legislature does it, mr. Speaker, is to meet and try to resolve those differences. You could divide the differences, the senate comes down 46 and we go up 45. My own view is mr. Ryan believes theres nothing he will agree to. I will get to that a little later, mr. Speaker. That is why we are not going to conference, and he said so in the paper. I will get to his quote in just a second. Let me ask the majority leader, mr. Speaker, mentioned the bill on the floor next week. Are essentially going to be at the end of the session. Before the august break coming next week on friday. We have done for appropriation bills. The house bill of which the majority Leader Speaks is 17 below the budget control act we agreed on. , mr. Speaker, it is 9 load the sequester level. Below the sequester level. We are not going to vote for it. We believe that badly underFund Transportation, housing and infrastructure in this country. But this performance makes some sense considering the lack of regular order. We talked about regular order and we dont follow it. Going to conferences regular order. It doesnt change the fact that we just have 14 days left to go and then we need to reach agreement. I will tell my friend, the majority leader, that we are willing to Work Together. We have been willing to compromise. We have compromised in every one of these agreements we have reached. My friend, the majority leader would say they have as well. But you cannot compromise if you dont sit down. I will tell you nobody has called me to ask me how i believe we can get to the end of this year with a continuing resolution. Nobody has asked me that. I talked to mr. Ryan. I talked to mr. Van hollen. Mr. Ryan has not talked to mr. Van hollen. With all due respect to this ,iscussion about talking theyre not talking. I talked to senator murray. No discussion on how we resolve the difference. I talked to the chair of the appropriations committee, the Ranking Member here and the chair on the senate side. Nobody is talking to them about how we resolve the question at the end of next month and we wont be here at the end of next month. We are in session two weeks in september. I want to use a quote, but we should not pass a continuing resolution and i will not vote for a continuing resolution unless we talk about preconditions. For going to conference. Talk about preconditions. Talk about demands and ultimatums. I will not vote for a continuing resolution unless it defund obamacare. For the time of the continuing resolution. Nobody in america believes that is going to be done. A lot of people i know, the majority people tell me the majority leader would tell me that a lot of people wanted done. Sign thedent wont defunding of obamacare because he believes its in the best interest of the health of our people. Nd the welfare of our country and yes, even job creation and Economic Growth. He wont rubio says vote for a continuing resolution unless it does something that is not going to happen. The majority leader said they wont go to conference. Nother ultimatum unless the senate abandon its point of view. The senate has a right to it point of view and we have a right to our point of view. We need to discuss it. Thats the way you get things done in a democracy, mr. Speaker. I want to ask the majority leader, does the gentleman expect we will go to conference at all at any time on the budget . And i yield to my friend. , i thank ther gentleman for yielding and i appreciate his questions. I would note for the record that i believe, if i have my facts correct, that during the time the gentleman was in majority last, the last congress, it was the 111th, 48 times there was an avoidance of going to conference. So all of a sudden now, the gentleman says that is the panacea. , would tell the gentleman given his litany of examples of who is talking to him around here, there is a lot of talk about how we resolve our differences. In fact i do know that chairman ryan is talking with chairman murray across the capital about how we go forward. I would underscore to the gentleman that it is not our intention to discuss taking more hardearned taxpayer dollars from americans while we have not fixed the problems they expect us to fix. I would also say to the gentleman as far as appropriation bills are concerned, he is correct. I did announced that the bill would be coming to the floor next weekend it will be the fifth bill that we will do time. To the august work i would remind the gentleman when he was last in the position of the majority, the appropriations bill did not come to the floor in under an open process. In fact, the restructured rules on every much easier to shut out diverse opinion, but the speaker has wes congress, insisted that have an open process and allow for robust debate on difficult issues. The gentleman that knows we have been true to that word. I remind him there is a commit it to open process, a commitment here to try to resolve these challenges before us. Have aorrect, we will busy fall, trying to address the needs of this country, whether it is spending and budget needs or whether it is the needs of the middleclass families struggling out there, wondering when the economy is going to pick up. Wondering what is going to happen to the health care. We have a looming obamacare law that already the administration has admitted is threatening job offer, therefore, they relief to businesses, but refused to do so for working people. We do not think that is fair. We have Democratic Union leaders who have said this law is going to provide and has already created nightmare scenarios for millions of working americans, so far as their healthcare and welcome wellbeing is concerned. I hope the gentleman will abide by what i know he has always been for, solving problems. I hope he will work with us to do that in the coming months. Mr. Speaker, i appreciate the oftlemans recitation history. Let me remind him that, when i was leader, all 12 bills were passed before august rate. That also happened the third year. It did not happen the second year when we had a lot of political elites, and the reason we went to structured rules is because we had filibuster by amendment. Inhad delay and obstruction 2007, just as we have today. Just as there is a refusal to a to go to conference. That both houses have passed their budgets, we have still refused to go to conference. That is why you cannot get agreement, and the gentleman characterizes mr. Ryan has talked to ms. Murray, and senator murray does not believe it was a long more substantive discussion because and you talk about mr. Ryan i have a quotation of his you will like, because it makes the point i am making, that will make it later, paul ryan, when asked about Senate Republicans planning to work with democrats to a dress the debt ceiling, said this, it does not matter, we are not going to do what they want to Senate Republicans. It really does not matter what being Senate Republicans. It does not matter what john mccain and others do on the taxes and the rest. If they want to give up taxes for sequester, we will not do that. It does not really affect us. But it does affect us. Because, if we cannot get folksent, those american of which the majority leader just spoke, who are looking for jobs, who want to see the economy grow, who are suffering because of gridlock am a who have a lack of confidence because this congress does not the most Dysfunctional Congress in which i have served, and i have been here 33 years. The least Productive Congress in which i have served. Mr. Speaker, that is what we need to be doing. Republican inher the senate, talking about trying to get to agreement, if republicans in both houses simply refused this is their strategy, mr. Speaker if republicans in both houses simply refuse to vote for any continuing resolution that contains further funding for further elephant could for further enforcement for obama care we had an election you did not win that argument at the national level. Mr. Speaker, i said mr. Obama won that argument. Senator leahy says he will not includesa c. R. If it further funding for further enforcement of obamacare. Stop theop it, we can individual mandate from going into effect. How . By shutting down government. That is their strategy. We do not think that is a good strategy, mr. Speaker. We think that is a bad strategy. He did not want to see that. We are prepared to Work Together, the compromised, to do that, but nobody believes, just as the gentleman said he will not agree to tax increases am a romisel have to comp on that. Nobody believes that the president will compromise after an election, after being reelected on a Healthcare Program that is benefiting millions of people right now. Nobody believes we will compromise on that. 39 times we have tried to repeal it in one form or another. It has failed. We got to come to rips with that. Members mr. Ouse mulvaney from South Carolina said it is completely appropriate to use the debt. To ask forhe c. R changes to reduce the burdens of this law on americans. They have offered that dirty nine times. It is not going to happen. Apparently, strategy is we are prepared to strike down government unless they will be but toned into agreeing doing it our way if we do not do it our way, we will not do it anyway. That is what the budget conference is about and what be about. E seems to senator toomey on the other hand this has been the way we have been operating for a couple of years now. Toomey,senator pat former chair of the club for growth, said, it is a disaster. It is a terrible way to run government. Senator to me and i do not always agree, but we agree very emphatically on that. Describedn tom cole the latest shutdown threat, which is what the previous three speakers had indicated, tom cole describes the latest threat as the political equivalent of throwing a temper tantrum. That is tom cole, chairman of the Republican Campaign committee, mr. Speaker, not knee. This youo get past will not do this, i will not do that, and figure out what we will do, i say to my friend, the majority leader, and we have 14 days to do it. We have not gotten it done yet, and frankly we have nothing on the calendar for next week that toward that moving and. I would hope very sincerely that we could come to agreement, and we were not come to agreement on something that was so hard fought for the last five. We know that. We know you will not raise taxes. But the fact of the matter is we need to come tour agreement. Americans expect us to come to agreement. With so few legislative days remaining before the fiscal year ends and the fact that we must gentleman, i hope the will give clarity as to what will be addressed in september, the nine days, since we are so far off course from regular order on the budget and appropriations schedule. Can members expect to see a d. C. R. And does the gentleman have any idea what the cr will look like, what it will encompass, what we can expect . We democrats are prepared to walk rate in that effort. We are not as a matter of a fact, boehner decided that after election, he said your Health Care Law has been confirmed. I want to make it clear we willing to do some things, we are not willing however to see the sequester cripple policies that this congress has adopted. We are not willing to defund the Affordable Care act. We are not willing to shift more of the burden onto the backs of the middle class. We are not willing to target medicare or medicaid and education for the deep cuts we were in the labor health bill. We will not consider the labor health bill. It is supposed to be marked up today. It was pulled. Heay to the gentleman that should and his colleagues be willing to compromise on the few legislative days we have remaining, and if he is, he will have a willing partner in me and in democrats, because we believe we need to come to an agreement. Lastly, let me speak of the debt ceiling. The majority leader has made it clear he thinks not resolving the debt ceiling would be a bad policy for our country. I believe it would be a disastrous thing for our country, for the economy, for every american, and people around the world. We know that what happened last time, we were downgraded. It is the Majority Partys responsibly in each house to make sure that americas credit worthiness is not put at risk, that we pay our bills. Im hopeful and i want to tell my friend that i am prepared to work in tandem with the majority leader, mr. Speaker, to pass a debt limit extension. We will do so in an equal way so that whatever political consequences there are we will take them together to do what the majority leader and the speaker and mr. Mcconnell have said is the responsible thing to do. We are prepared to take half of that responsibility with them. We would hope they would join us in that effort. Mccain has said that republican colleagues are already saying we will not raise the debt limit unless theres repeal of obamacare. Aid i wouldain s love to repeal obamacare. But he said i promise you that will not happen on the debt limit. The president has made it clear it is not going to happen. Someone would like to go on with his quotation, so some would like to set up one of the shut down the government threats, and most americans are really tired of those kinds of sheen and against here in washington. That is senator mccain. I have quoted senator toomey and senator mccain who believe we need to come to agreement. I have also unfortunately quoted senator congressman ryan who said he does not care what senator mccain thinks, who was a candidate for president a few years ago. Mr. Speaker, i want to ask the leader if he expects we will take an up or down vote on a debt limit extension when we come in september, and i yield. Would say to the gentleman the answer to that last question is no, but i would say to the discussion the gentleman just had was so full of just so various and sundry issues, i do not know where to begin, other than to say what is lost in the gentlemans comments is the focus on the hardworking families and businesses of middleclass america, and it seems to me, mr. Speaker, that the gentleman is full of that is not going to happen because washington says that is not going to happen for political reasons. And what we ought to be focused on is how we can act to solve the anxiety that seems to continue to grow on the part of the American Public when they wonder about their job, they worry about their tuition cost, they worry about their childrens education, they worry every night when the go to bed. The gentleman is so sure that we can and cannot do things for thetical reasons president is out giving campaign speeches, some of which we have heard dozens of times during the campaign season, thats what all of us should be absolutely focused on is coming together, not for political imperative, but to solve the problems and provide the relief to the middle class of this country that is asking us to do that. Instead of the political demands and imperatives that the issues was list of about, lets focus on the people that sent us here, lets ensure that this body of any in washington can begin to work for the people rather than the other way around. I yield back. I have heard that answer more than the president has given the speeches, that mr. Cantor refers to. This party has always been, is now, and will be focused on the working people to which the majority leader refers. The president asked us to pass a jobs bill. No jobs bill has been brought to this floor. There are some bills that the Republican Party leader wants to say, mr. Speaker, our jobs bills. There has been no comprehensive is nonels, there scheduled for next week, but what the people are concerned about is their board of directors is not working. His is not about washington this is about people who voted all over america. And the leader and his party point, and we had election, not in washington, all over america, and america voted and it has not made any difference on this floor. Politics as usual. Convocations as usual. Refusal, compromise as usual. Talk about regular order, but not going to conference, not on a budget, on a farm bill, not going to conference on a violence against women act. We finally passed that. There was not a bill to go to conference on that. The majority leader wants to focus on working people, he is absolutely right. And the working people of and i told the majority leader last week 1,400,000 of them, more of them voted on our side for their side. But his side is in charge. We understand that. We know we need to compromise, Work Together. But we have not been doing so, and he can talk as much as he wants. That is what the people believe as well. I tell my friend the majority leader. I asked him about the debt limit. He said no. One of his will the gentleman yield . I want to clarify what he said, that the debt limit extension was not going to come to the floor. In september. I appreciate that. Can he tell us if there is a clean debt limit extension after september . I want to repeat so that he knows, is party knows, and american knows, we are repaired to work with the Majority Party to do in a bipartisan way what ever leader believes is the responsible action to take. One of his predecessors am a senator roy blunt, said in responding to whether we ought to risk default by not passing a debt limit, he said this no, i do not support that. I think holding the debt limit in other words, if you do not do the debt limit, we would not do this and the other or said another way, if you do not repeal obamacare, we will let the country default senator blunt, again, one of his predecessors, i do not support that, i think holding the debt limit hostage to any specific the bestprobably not negotiating place. I thank my friend for his comment. I would again ask him, could we expect a clean debt limit extension at some point in time between september 30 and november 15 . I will say to the gentleman it is our hope that we can Work Together across the aisle to solve the problems, to come up with the answers as to how we are going to pay back the Additional Debt that we will have to incur in this country. I think whatever budget you look at, their site or our side, mr. Iterationnin any calls for Additional Debt. It calls for the need to internet thats so we can relieve the American People of that continued liability, and our side has said we would like to do so within the next 10 years, bring the budget to allens. I hope that the gentleman will join us in that spirit rather than saying we should just continue to borrow into eternity without some recognition that that just cannot be a sustainable solution, either. I would say to the gentleman, when he is off talking about the need to go to conference and some of the statements he made about the farm bill were inaccurate but i think there are a lot of things that this house has done that the president nor the senate seems willing to respond. As i said before, what we are trying to do is a respite needs of the working people, the middle class of this country. We passed the skills act. That was a bill designed to try and align the worker Training Programs at the federal level with the Employment Opportunities out there across the different regions of the country. So we could respond to the fact there are hundreds of thousands of jobs openings in Certain Industries simply because of their workforce does not have the proper skills and training. The president , if he wanted to help the middle class families, instead of off a penny again, giving speeches, he could come saycall off harry reid and bring the bill to the floor, mr. Leader, we could do something for American People. This house last week passed a bill which i believe, and i am sure the gentleman shares my sentiment, that ultimately what we have got to do to grow our economy to secure our Economic Future is provide for quality education for our kids. We passed a landmark piece of legislation last week without any bipartisan support, mr. Speaker, what if the gentleman is so intent on wanting to help and wanting to do something, not because of washingtons needs, but because of what we have to do for the kids across this country and their families, then lets help try to forge an answer on reauthorizing the education bill. That madessed a bill it easier for working families to spend time with their kids and hold down a wage job, and hourly wage job. Is there any movement on that . The president could say lets do that, lets provide relief to the middle class. We also passed in the house several energy bills to help the families out there across this country who are on their vacations right now, choking when they see the price of gas at the pump. We have bills, the resident could go ahead and approve the keystone pride blind. Where else in the world would you have an environmentally sensitive people other than in america question mark we do it cleaner and better than anyone. To sit here and deny us the opportunity to take advantage of our indigenous resources of all it does is cost are working families and businesses more money. They have also passed bills to allow for the safe and environmentally sensitive way of going enter deep oceans, to go in and tap into the resources that are there. Thinks that technology has norashed, yet the senate the president seem interested in helping the middle class and the working families, because all we hear from the other side is what we can and cannot do politically here in washington. I would say to the gentleman, there are plenty of things we can get done together, lets start to focus on the people of this country, not the political imperatives of this institution, and i yield back. I thank the gentleman for that response, which i took as a no, which did not indicate that we could expect to see bipartisan work on making sure that the government pays its bills that have already been incurred. And a lot of rhetoric and a lot of recitation about bills. All those bills had something in it my way or do it no way. We had an election, i tell the. Entleman he knows that they thought they were going to take the senate, they did not. The majority in the senate is in the crafts. And the president of the United States was reelected. And that House Republican majority was returned. But that did not mean the American People do not expect us to Work Together. And i tell the gentleman i am not sure what ever he thought i made, we did not go to conference on the violence against women act, we did not go to the conference on the farm bill if the german would yield. I will yield. There was a blue slip on the senate bill, mr. Speaker, and we took up the bill in the house and went ahead and passed the bill. So i do not even know why that is even pertinent to this discussion, and i would say that gentleman understands as well there was a bipartisan farm bill that came to the floor, and if i recall, that right partisanship faded away which is what now then has caused the house to bring about other farm bill, and this time trying to be transparent in the process, brought up the Agricultural Policy piece which has passed the house without bipartisan support, and then we are also engaged in discussions with the chairman of the Agricultural Committee as to forging a consensus on a nutrition piece so we can act again on that. I say to the gentlemen, it is not accurate that we do not intend to eventually go to outerence and iron differences between the house and senate on both of those issues on the ag policies as well as nutrition policies. Fact. Alked about Pete Sessions, chairman of the rules committee, republican, said when we passed the farm this is anieve honest step to get us go bypassing part of the the farm bill to go to conference. I asked the gentleman last week, i ask him again, theres nothing here about going to conference. He told me we are not going to conference of the we passed the undernutrition part. We want to see something on the nutrition part passed. The sessions, talking about why they brought the farm bill to the floor and conditions it was, dropping all references and provisions for poor people to have nutritional assistance, said we are attempting to separate, bifurcate, offered today a rule and the underlying legislation which will go to conference, and in the senate because they passed their own farm bill, has included its provisions where they discussed nutrition program. As a result of that this is thations, speaking, should be in their bill as a conference measure. If we pass it at this point could go to conference. The gentleman is not accurate when he refunds theres nothing to go to conference on. The senate has amended their bill into the house bill. He could go to conference on that under the processes. The gentleman must know that. That was the expectation that Pete Sessions says was the purpose of passing the farm bill. That me go back to the point i was making before the gentleman i the to correct me on what think were accurate representations, both on all the pieces of legislation as i mentioned. Surely that is the case i mentioned. That is the case on the budget. I do not what the intention is, but we have not gone to conference on the farm bill, and we did not go to conference on the violence against women bill. The fact is what those bills that he mentioned did have in wemon is and he said had no democratic votes for it, there was no work to get them a craddick fouts, there were still work for compromise. That is why the polls reflect to. He working people such concern the majority talked a lot about confidence, talked a lot about Building Confidence if we are going to build the economy. I agree with him. We need to have individuals confident, and the gentleman of businessone leader says if they had confidence that we could Work Together and get things done, not put the debt limit and risk, not for the Ongoing Operations of government at risk, but continue to have fights i talked to a major leader of one of that Health Insurers in this country and said, we may never not like some of this bill, but we will try to make it work for all americans. We are not doing that, mr. Speaker. Were trying to to repeal. We are not conferencing. Youre not trying to come to compromise. We are talking about working people as is appropriate for us to do, and that is what the president is out doing, not hero in washington. I am talking all of us. He is talking to the people and saying this is my program, this is what i want to do, and im not getting cooperation from the congress of the United States. I think he is absolutely right, and he is talking to the people, not the us, not here in washington, but he is criticized for doing that by the majority leader. I think that is what he ought to be doing, because the people will ultimately have to make a decision as to who is looking out for their interests and who is sadly confronting and not listening to the people in the last election. In the last election or right now, when the people are saying, board of directors, Work Together, stop obstructing. I would hope we could do that, mr. Speaker. Unless the leader has Something Else he wants to say, i yield the balance of my time. The house returns tuesday for general speeches, 2 00 for legislative work. On their agenda, a bill to Fund Transportation for transportation and housing programs next year, also a bill to address the doubling of student Loan Interest rates. The latest version was approved by the senate yesterday. Follow the house live on cspan when they return. In new york at the united nations, a Security Council meeting was held today, and and youhat john kerry and secretarygeneral banking moon spoke briefly addressing a range of issues, sera, and a recent agreement by palestinian and israeli officials to resume the Peace Process. It is just under 10 minutes. We have a lot to cover, so i will be brief what we are going to discuss. First of all, we will need discussing the appalling situation in syria. The country is now continuing 2 2 years, more than 100 thousand people have been killed, millions of people have been displaced or been refugees in neighboring countries. The violent actions must be stocked by both parties, and it anan impaired of it is apparent of for a separate peace conference in geneva as soon as possible. Representatives and i will spare no efforts to start this meeting as soon as possible. The head of [indiscernible] and my high representative for disarmament have just visited senior officials of the steering government, to ofcuss the modalities investigation. We will get the report since they are coming out of syria now, as soon. On the middle east, i would like to highly commend and appreciate secretary kerrys leadership and consistent and principled engagement to revive this Peace Process for a two state solution. Hard negotiations lie ahead, but only the parties can make the decision. Ofrge the leaders palestine and israel to seize this opportunity and respond positively and courageously so that the two state solution can be realized as soon as possible. With secretary kerry and members of the Security Council today, we will discuss about this horrendous suffering now in the east of the democratic republic of [indiscernible] and in the region. It is imperative we support the framework of agreement for peace, security, and cooperation in the region. In that regard i welcome the Security Council meeting on the situation, chaired by secretary kerry, and i welcome the appointment of u. S. Government special envoy senator Russ Feingold. Coordinate with the special envoy mary roberts of and my special representative who will work closely with you and other parties. [indiscernible] secretary and the u. S. Government, and president obama, have been helping the International Community to help combat Climate Change and to define and establish a sustainable the moment goal and agenda. These are keys to longterm and irity of this world, count on continuing leadership and engagement and support of secretary kerry and president obama and the u. S. Government. The u. S. Governments strong leadership is crucial in foressing all issues humanity. Again, mr. Secretary, welcome to the united nations, and i look forward to have continuing strong support and engagement of the u. S. Government. Thank you very much. Welcome. Thank you very much. There we go. General, thank you for a very generals warm welcome here to the united nations. It is a privilege to be here with you. I am honored to have the privilege of sharing the debate today on the subject of the great lakes region. We are very grateful for your leadership, grateful for the united nations. I was just a few days ago in a where icamp in jordan saw firsthand the extraordinary work of the united nations, the experience that they have brought to the table in an effort to relieve and warmest levels of suffering, suffering that is growing by the day which requires all of us to work even harder to try to bring about these negotiations. There is no military solution to syria. There is only political solution. That will require leadership in order to bring people to the table. Yesterday i had a conversation with the foreign minister of russia. We remain committed to the effort to bring the parties to ourneva ii, and we will try hardest to make that happen. In the great lakes region, there is an opportunity for peace. This is an area that has been beleaguered i targeted, egregious violence, and the framework that has been put in place is an opportunity to be able to make a difference. The special envoy Russ Feingold closelyperate extremely with special representative in robinson and looks forward to going to work in order to implement the framework and bring about a sustainable solution to the absence of governance and the problems of violence in that part of the world. With respect to other areas, there are huge challenges, and we know. In south sudan, we need access to humanitarian access and we will continue to press the president and others to make that available. Finally, the granddaddy of them all, i guess, the question of the possibility of peace between palestinians and israelis. In the region, Prime Minister netanyahu and president abbas, have made a courageous decision to try to return to final status talks. It is my hope that that will be able to happen as procedures are put in place by both countries in order to empower that. Mr. Secretarygeneral, it is a in thise to be here institution, which dedicates itself daytoday to ending violence, to enforcing peoples prospects for peace and to try to live by a code of universal values that i think all of us are proud to be affiliated with. Thank you for your leadership and thank you for what coming me here today. Thank you. It iss is a website, really the history of Popular Culture. A collection of stories, rather, on the history of Popular Culture. Culture, it is quite more than that. What i have been trying to do with this site is going to more detail with how Popular Culture and sports ands other arenas. It is not just about pop culture. What we have on the site are stories about popular music, we have sports biography, we have history of media entities, newspaper history. There are a range of things. When i formulated the site, i purposely cast a wide net to see what would work. Founderth pop history jack doyle. Closey would come up as as they could, and then go into an assault which meant that they would send squads armed with [indiscernible] and would come charging at our and it did not matter how many casualties they down weree who went wave. Ed by a new many of the new wave did not have weapons. They just picked up those that had just went down. They just kept by force of numbers, trying to push us out of our positions. On americanend history tv on cspan3, commemorating the 60th anniversary of the korean war armistice, starting at saturday morning at 8 00 a. M. Eastern, then sunday morning at 10 00 when the president pastry to the korean war memorial. Tv, everyhistory tv. Eekend on cspan burgess spoke earlier today about the implementation of the Health Care Law and what healthead as the laws insurance exchanges go into effect in october. He spoke to a panel that included the former medicaidator of the and medicare services. It is just over an hour. Good morning. Politico editor at th pro. Thank you for coming out of us we are live streaming. We have a good panel. We will talk about state enrollment and about the other aspects about the aca. Cvsuld like to thank caremark. Here to say a few words from cvs oulkes. K is helena f good morning. Thrilled at cvs caremark to sponsor this event and have an esteemed group of purchasing of participants. The Affordable Care act has been described as one of the complex implementations in the history of u. S. Healthcare healthcare system, and i think that is in many ways what october 1 starts like feeling like tomorrow. I recently heard someone say somethingprogram is like building a bridge from two different sides and hope it meets in the middle, and that is an excellent description, but one of the things that this bridge building has done is brought a lot of people together sector, government nonprofits, and corporations to try to figure out to make it work. One of the best ways for us at cvs caremark to make that connection is to build the knowledge gap that exists. Just today, cvs caremark release research that shows 36 of who arehat we surveyed likely to enroll in the harris healthcare exchanges need more information as they think about this. Even more striking about half of those people who are in fact eligible for subsidies do not know they are eligible. We also found overall awareness is up at 74 . Were people know at least that this is coming and they are prepared to do something. We serve over 5 Million People at cvs every day and feel strongly that our 25,000 pharmacists and 2500 Nurse Practitioners can play an Important Role in helping consumers navigate this impacts. What we will be doing over the next several months is working hard to create a National Information outreach program, which will include events and displays in our stores, to help customers and role in these new plans. 60 percent of people we surveyed actually just expect pharmacies to be able to provide them with exchangerelated information. Im sure panelists will agree the implementation will be complemented complicated. Im sure they will help us pick the program were four of americans we can serve. I will pass it back to joanne. Thanks very much. [applause] thank you so much. To everybody watching us, you can complete your questions. I will track twitter from your questions from your tablet. You know i am not good at that. [laughter] i got it right last time. I would like to welcome our panelists. Representative michael burgess, the vice chairman of the house energy and commerce subcommittee on health. That morning. Gauthi Senior Program directore for ther National Academy for state Health Policy, but mcclellan, marian and Mark Parkinson of kansas, who is now the ceo of ahca. Thank you for joining us. They will talk to each other and we will take questions from the audience and twitter. Lets get started. We wanted to get experts to had a National Overview and some people had statespecific knowledge. We want to talk about what is happening on the ground in terms of the a cap next and what is going well in terms of the mechanics, and has become a red hot political issue. We have seen in last few weeks it has risen back to some of the intensity that we saw before. A little about we know here what the rhetoric is light and what the argument is like in washington. How intense is that . Have you seen the same intensity back home . Probably the same for you in texas. I want to give people a moment to check their programs. There was a way i thought this was a healthcare briefing. Physician ando a ob gyn, and member of the House Doctors caucus. On you on thed last minute. I told you know bill would come to the house floor because it would never get to the senate. The Supreme Court will take care of us. The big election will take care of it. Wrong on all counts. As i watch both up here and back home, back home you are not seeing a lot of activity because texas has said were not doing the exchanges exchanges, we will let the government set that up and take that responsibility, and Medicaid Expansion is not something the governor said we will do. Even though the state legislature is in special session im not, they are working on other things and not this. From the washington perspex have and where perspective and where a lot of the focus has been since the first of the year is, can this thing get up and running . While the witnesses who have come in from the agencies will tell you, we will be ready, everything is on track, on schedule, and you look around and things are falling off as you go down the road in this trail of debris that is left behind the Affordable Care act as it bounces down the road. That we to revelations will delay the employer mandate was started, but in the context that a few weeks before we asked can you do this, can you delay it, and they will be ready 100 . In a few short weeks later, theyre faced with these headlines. One of the most troubling things to me in the recent weeks is the concept that since we are not collecting enough from employers any longer, we will trust people to tell us the truth. What could go wrong with that . It is a concern to me, and i hope later the something something were summer we will hear something on the subsidy capture, because people are not aware that generate one, 2014, there will be us is is he available, they will be asked how much money are you going to earn this year. Know howe difficult to much im going to earn in a year ahead because there are a lot of unknowns. At the end of the year there will be subsidy recapture. To thesidy will be paid insurance company, but the individual will be responsible for any recapture that happens. There is a lot of anxiety out there, a lot of . Marks. Question stay tuned. Is there a trail of debris in california . No, i would not say that. I am from the left coast in two ways. California has embraced the Affordable Care act and has moved quickly to implement many of its aspects. We have established a state based exchange, given strong governance and leeway to influence the market him and we have recently embraced the Medicaid Expansion available under the Affordable Care act. Many important milestones have been hit. The political environment is not particularly divisive in because we have democrat controlled legislature as well as a democratic governor. I think the stay tuned comment is not out of place in california either. It is a very competent law with moving parts create a lot will play on out in terms of how it will play out in california. You succeeded secretary sibelius and now you have a conservative governor brownback. You have had a controversy between an Insurance Commission in the state who is wanted to go ahead with a lot of implementation and a governor who does not want to go near it and the governor prevailed. Youre living in washington, but you keep track. What is the intensity there . In kansas iscs incredibly interesting. I have lived in kansas for the five years and i do not understand it. Thomas frank wrote 15 years ago what is wrong with kansas and opined kansas had transformed itself into a permanent conservative state. He was disproved when Kathleen Sebelius was elected governor and served for six years and i finished off the last two years of her term. Now it looks like Thomas Franks thesis was correct, with me leaving, governor brownback was elected, extremely conservative, the legislature has become conservative, and there are still a myth of moderate the state. He have had this interesting dynamic the last few years were republican governor is strongly against the Medicaid Expansion and the aca in general and a republican Insurance Commissioner, a modern pop, who supported the legislation, wanted very badly Foreign Exchange to be set up and it be implemented and when you pet a governor against a commissioner, guess what, the governor usually wins. That is what has happened in kansas, but it has been interesting to watch. Survived the implementation of ama, which was hard and come located is not technically as complicated and nor is it politically as divisive. There were some democrats who voted for it. Even though democrats who fought about it in washington, they went home and were not quite as emphatic about it in terms of enrollment and getting the low income population in. We are two months out now. It will bectrum of bumpy but it will work, if all fall apart, what is your what do you worry about when youre alone . [laughter] i cannot go to sleep at night when i am not on the front lines on the law. I would say it will be somewhere between those two extremes, that there is a wide margin. It will vary from state to state a staunch states like california that has done a lot to implement ofir asked ranges, a lock outrage and activities ongoing, versus some of the states with the federal fallback implementation, they are not expanding medicaid, they have lawhas much exposure to the. I think two things that are worth mentioning that are similar from Medicare Part d implementation. One is to make a distinction between the philosophical and political differences about where our countrys Health Care System should head and what that means broadly for the public. That is an issue where we have very different views, and congress throughout the country, and that will continue. Fromt to distinguish that what the program that is in law actually means as it is being implemented and what the public has not focused on yet understandably because they do not have to make decisions yet is what does it mean for me, and there will be some questions from republicans, democrats, will get these questions, and they will refer people to the resources that were available. One visit difference in what we did is we get a whole round of outreach and education info Structure Building way before this point in implementation. That was a good year out, meaning a range of local groups which supported and opposed the medicare modernization act, made and not a philosophical issue, but a practical issue of we want to make sure people come to you with questions or when you are talking about this, where to go to get answers. We work with them to come up with those kinds of tools. There was a different approach here, more Campaign Style, but i think that was one important difference. The other important difference is medicare modernization act implementation really lasted one season from the fall of 2005 through early 2006. 7 million beneficiaries switch over their coverage on monday. That contributed to a lot of the startup issues that we had, but we worked through them in a month or two, and the vast majority of beneficiaries made a decision by the time of the open and room and. Ended. That is not likely to happen in this case. Everybodys projections, there will be a lot of people who will remain uninsured after the first od, both byment peri their charts but because there may not be options available because theyre not options available in their state. This will be a severalyear implementation process with more opportunities for debating whether this is the right way to go and probably some more needs for modifications to the program along the way. Months out, youre working with all the states or many of the states. You have talked in the past i have not seen you for a while, youve talked in the past about the difference between what the politicians are saying and what actually is happening on on the ground. Has that gap widened in the states that are quite resistant, or it may very. Their state ring federal exchanges that are working on certification or some aspect that there are de facto partnerships. What do you see when you land somewhere as opposed to what were hearing at that big building over there . Let me start with the ageold state Health Policy at issue is if you have seen one state u. S. Seen one state. There is. That said, i can talk about groups of states in groupings. There are the states that have embraced reforms, the state based exchanges, and they are working hard and they are going to be ready for opening in october. The directors and we work closely with them i spent a date recently with some of the they the exchanges are mission driven, and their missioncritical is to get the doors opened, if you will. But it is not going to be the 2. 0 version you will see over time as improvements are made. It is going to be offering options for coverage, for the folks that are eligible, with a lot of creativity. In terms of the outreach and in terms of the way that they are connecting with consumers. Then you have the partnership tates that have defaulted to the federal government, and all you did not have a lot of activity at the political level, you have and foyers who are civil stirred state employees who have jobs today. Let me take Insurance Commissioners. Their job job is to protect the consumers and to make sure that the coverage they have is quality coverage and that there are no ill toward insider going on. They take that job very seriously in all of the states. Some of them have taken a step further. For example, they understand there are going be questions when the federally facilitated exchange opens, and they are prepared to answer those questions and field them. Some of them are looking in the state of kansas to what they could possibly do to make it easier for consumers to understand their choices in kansas. Departments almost all of them, whether expanding or not, have put in new eligibility systems in order to make it smoother for implementation, and this is the law of the land. They are working hard to implement it. As someone who you work in the Bush Administration, fda, youre an economist, position physician. Watch, just from a technical perspective and you watch what they are doing, say you are watching the evening news. What makes you say, dont do that . I dont know how much advice you give them. I dont have that reaction during the evening news very often. Metaphorically. Right. Three times coming up when i might have that reaction. One of them is in september. When you see the results of the policy decisions made, and that is, what lands are available, how much is it going to cost, how good this that look . Vary acrossso states. States have had a lot of insurance regulation before. Some states may be having a more comprehensive set of plans. We will see when the federal plan is released in september. There are a number of people who already have individual or Small Group Insurance coverage and are not operating under all the rules that federal exchanges, the federal fallback exchanges, or the rest of the law now who probably will face changes, some of which will be significant premium increases. That is something to watch in september. The next thing will be how well the systems work. Thatll see version 1. 0 of on october 1. They have made a lot of investments and upgrading of medicaid, i. T. Systems. The administration seems to be trying very hard to put as many of the pipes together, they have deferred some as already mentioned, there is a big difference between how Information Technology works in theory and how real world, messy, incomplete or otherwise incompatible data that have not had to flow together work and practice. There will be a lot of issues around that. There is the education outreach. There are a lot of questions about how well people are going to do in terms of finding out about this, and especially for younger, healthier people how they will make decisions. I certainly have opinions on this. They talk about having a war room in the administration. Thats what i would be focusing thedo they really have intel on the ground to see how willome of these problems be, and am i in a position to quickly respond. To october 1. Everyone in this room understands this is a process. It even when less politically heated, it was designed as a process. No one expected to have 30 Million People sign up on day one. Be a snapshotto quality to it on october 1 and then again the first week of january. It may gerbil out a little bit more because not everybody will be getting care the first day dribble out a little bit more because not everybody will be getting care the first day. If you have a serious chronic disease and you miss your medication one day right. Texas is one of the state most opposed. Is symbolic of the resistance or opposition. What happens in texas on day one, october 1 . Two people say, this is the worst thing ive ever heard of do people say, this is the worst thing ive ever heard of . To pick up on marks point, Medicare Part d was more pragmatic. This is much more political. You hear and read about people in rural america. On theocus will be number. They have already released the numbers. Of that have to be in the young, invincible category for the economics of this to work. I would imagine that they are very much focused on getting to that 7 million number as quickly as they can. Going to mislead about their particular situation, but i have a large state with a number of uninsured. They havee sure that income levels that qualify for a subsidy. It will have to be sorted out at the end of the year, so there will be some difficulties there. At the same time, if the only metric is the number right now, that seems to be the case i would expect a lot of activity in a state like mine. Not seeing it right now. Maybe happening under the radar. Rural americafrom is not only to get someone sign up for insurance, we get paid on a per head assignment and we get them on a voter roll so that this may be useful information to us in the future. A lot of things happening at once there. But you dont see a lot of it youre not reading the articles in the paper, seeing people talk about on the evening news. Is there evidence that they are just looking for poor people and say, forget about your income, we will sign you up and worry about it next year . I wonder if that wouldnt naturally be involved as a business model. We have identified what success is. 7 Million People. We need to get there quickly. In order to say, this is working , this is where the money is. You are doing much more outreach. , it is aoing messaging totally political environment but you have hardtoreach populations. You have nonenglishspeaking, farm areas. The obstacles are similar in a different political context. What are you seeing and what happens when it starts in october . There will be a Huge Investment in research and enrollment in california. There are very Big Investments that will be made by covered californias state based exchange, to do outreach targeting the population that is expected to be subsidy eligible. Also a very Large Campaign funded by a statewide Healthcare Foundation in california, targeting primarily people who are already or anticipated to be medical eligible. Medical being californias medicaid program. Be well targeted and focused. Theres going to be a huge outpouring of money. The question will be, how effective is it at targeting people who are eligible and how receptive our people to messages presented to them . Certainly, a great deal of thought and energy is being put into these very questions, targeting ethnic populations, dispersing geographically and where the highest pockets of uninsured are. Partnering through State University systems that have natural affinities to younger people and their families. The question will be when people receive that message, what do they do . Do they go to another source to learn more . When they get there, do they find an attractive set of option are affordable, and with conditions that are understandable . I think that is a huge question about how people navigate that and engage with that. To the extent that you see what is going on in kansas october 1. I realize the metric is, can we add folks who are not insured right now. The future and success of the aca will be dependent on the impact that folks already have coverage. I look at the cost and access issue. Proponents have said we can do this major expansion and you wont lose your coverage, your choices. Your cost will be the same and may even decline. Folks who have argued against it said, youre not going to have your choices and your coverage will go up genetically. Dramatically for people who currently have coverage, the political dynamics are such that it will be very difficult for the law to remain the law in the long term. Correctroponents are and costs are the same and people can go to the same doctor they have always gone to, i dont think it matters how long it takes to enroll new people. Law is in place long enough, eventually the Medicaid Expansion will continue. Eventually folks will get enrolled. People arent going to say, we need to get rid of it because we only signed up 2 Million People. On the other hand, if people cant go to the doctor they want to go to, they dont care if we eat the 7 million number. 7 million previously uninsured is significant. Another important number the administration talked about is that the vast majority of americans who have coverage through a larger employer, who have medicaid already or saidare, the president youre not affected by this at all. Lot,lion may seem like a but if you look at people who have individual coverage now plus people who have coverage through small businesses, its a much larger number than 7 million. Are going touals be significantly affected by the law. The choices they have now will be replaced by choices in the individual exchanges. 7 million, is that 7 million who are currently uninsured or 7 million who have is that 7 million going to exchanges who might be going to the individual market now . Definition. Broad we expect to have 7 Million People sign up. The Governors Point is correct. Where we are heading in this discussion 12 months from now, the unintended consequences and impact on price which will occur september, october of 2012 just before election time, that does drag. Ignificant political im sorry, 2014. [laughter] line allome see me off the time who work in the insurance industry. They talk about the same things mark mentioned, the cost to the individual who has something now , their choice and price point may be significantly different a year from now. Back to the take us focus on october 1 and january 1 and the number of 7 million. While the news may want to pick it up, i think the exchange is important for leaders to message but that is not the critical date. October 1 is one things open. It is likely the numbers will not be met right away. Look back at when the Check Program went into effect in 1997 and it took significantly longer for enrollment to happen than originally planned. I think thats almost more analogous than Medicare Part d because it was folks who did not have insurance as opposed to the medicare population. Im not saying we cant learn a lot from the medicare implementation. In the intervening years, there has been an awful lot learned about how best to reach the kinds of people theyre trying to reach very weve had a whole social media revolution, we have had a lot of research in the last couple of years that states have done to understand how to reach the target population. What bringingout these techniques to our reach enrollment may have. Thent to emphasize that state leaders we talk with on a regular basis understand that this is not a sprint. It feels like one. Marathon, and it is the longerterm improvement of the healthcare system, getting more people people quality coverage and more affordable coverage that is the promise on the upside of these reforms. States you look at the you always knew the states would be different rat. This was not designed to be totally identical. Whether he would be more you talk, more massachusetts. You never thought it would be it would be more you talk, more massachusetts. You never thought it would be uniformed. How uneven do you think the results are going to be . Six months, a year from now, how different is it going to look . I think it is unlikely in this vast country to be one model that works perfectly. There could be multiple ways that an exchange is governed, ways it reaches its consumers, ways that it actually goes into. Ersion 2. 0 some of the states are looking ahead to really impact the quality of their Delivery System with choices they make. There could be positive or negative outcomes for patients with different models. What is important is that we learn the lessons of what is working and does not work and spread them quickly so that those who come behind can adopt. Ome of those practices i want to give governor parkinson a couple of minutes. The political focus and the fighting and the money is focused on enrollment and coverage. But there is the other 900 pages which depends on which edition you are looking at, the number of pages that affects how healthcare is delivered. I want you to talk a little bit about that overlooked part of it. That would not happen without the law or would not be as advanced. Its a very under discussed topic. We tend to think of the aca as an expense and issue expansion issue. When i talk to my old boss, they will argue vehemently that this is also getting at cost and quality issues. Im fortunate to have the position now where i run a trade the holy grail of payment for providers has been, what do we do to reduce costs, keep quality the same or improve it . There are parts of the aca that get to that. Dual demonstration projects across the country are spreading. Were trying to take care of folks that are eligible for medicare and medicaid at the same time and figure out by coordinating that benefit, we can reduce cost and keep quality at the same level. Affordable Care Organizations are popping up across the country to coordinate benefits and keep costs the same or lower while increasing quality. A lot of these things are not being discussed as much as the expansion topic. But in the long run, they may have a very large impact in moving along that whole movement of Higher Quality and lower cost. There one specific program in one specific state that you get excited about. In my current position, i tend to get more worried than excited. Dual demonstration projects that combine the medicare and medicaid benefit. In a very big way in california, that will roll out next spring. We have the Care Organizations that keep providers together with hospitals to try to. Oordinate that postacute care it is a threat and opportunity. If we can figure out how to do this right, it can be a terrific thing for providers and beneficiaries. But we could also make some major mistakes and have very poor results. We are more focused on that part of the aca then expansion than expansion. Is the Medicaid Expansion or lack thereof going to create more unevenness in this world . Not really. It doesnt affect longterm care providers as much as it would for hospitals or doctors. Broader spectrum, absolutely. You talk to a hospital exec and a state not doing Medicaid Expansion, they have a different outlook. We have a twitter question. The question is, someone mentioned Campaign Style education. How has it helped . You might want to say, how has it hurt . California first. How is this concept of a campaign playing out. I think that was ans comment. Anns comment. The campaign in california has not launched yet. It is extremely important to watch how it works. Scope, people a sense of the California Exchange will be 100 million in the Public Affairs campaign over the next couple of years. Huge amount of money even in a state the size of california. It compares the 50 million that kaiser permanent they invested in its thrive permanente invested in its thrive program. Will it work . We will see when it is on the ground. This campaign and Public Education is also campaign with a political connotation. And roll america is people closely associated with the and roll america is people closely associated with the white house enroll america is people closely associated with the white house. In 2005, democrats really did not like it or wanted to change it. They would come here and say, i want to repeal it, modify it. We heard it every day. They would go home and have more of a proactive outreach. I dont know of any republicans that maybe some im not aware of any that are proactively going out to a health fair in saying, im going to help you sign up. Can i address that . Sure. There would be no mechanism by which you would know how to do that. The information coming out of the administration has been so sparse. I dont attend the democratic caucus. They had a thing about it this week, this will be your friend down the road. But very Little Information is coming out. There were not governors down at the white house when this was crafted. The governors you will depend on for this thing to work a kind of cut out of the program. Where was the governor of indiana, who delivered care in his healthy indiana plan for employees and cut costs . It was with a Health Savings account model. He found out something magic happens when people spend money for their own health care. There were a lot of opportunities missed. Its not my position to advise the administration. Those opportunities are continuing to be missed. A couple points about campaign. California is a good example of doing a largescale, Public Outreach campaign. That is a fraction of the amount of money and resources. There is a different strategy much more modern Campaign Style, microtargeting. That is not what happened for technological and other reasons in 2005, 2006 with medicare. I dont think they could have done that. Is a two edgedt sword. It is a way of reaching people faster, but there is a lot of information that the administration cannot control that will also spread that rapidly as these outreach and er activities occur on twitterre relying for your enrollment information there would be issues, yes. Our outreach and education infrastructure was led by a mixture of people, some who supported the law and some who did not. It was focused from when we set it off a year before on information that is reliable so people can make an informed choice. Ask them over and over again, what is it that you are seeing, your family members, what do they want to know . It focused on that. It was not a Campaign Strategy style of identifying, who is likely to benefit or potentially be a target for this program, and how can we microtarget them . There is a next step to this. Its not the same thing as just getting somebody out to vote. Its one thing to get them to engage and look at the information, a second thing to help them make an informed, honest fact basis decision about, what does this mean for me and is it a good idea for me to sign up . Thats not a typical campaign decision. Its a thoughtful decision. This will be much more challenging than deciding what to buy on amazon, which hotel to book. This is like deciding a mortgage for your house. Thats not a typical Campaign Strategy focus, that is an education information tool focus that needs to accompany and that is happening in the states that are implementing their own statebased exchanges and in the Partnership States that are doing consumer assistance. And at the federal level that are developing the website and consumer assistance for the federally facilitated marketplace. While there is Campaign Style trying to reach folks going on, i dont think in my experience with the people im talking to in the state, there is nobody that thinks that is enough without having this other important education that needs to happen. Its not easy to figure out how to tell people to understand their choices. Everyone in this room and out there knows that explaining insurance is a lot different than explaining those features of the newest smartphone. Theres a lot of work going into trying to make that simple. None of us here knows if that is going to work well or not. Do we have audience questions . Stand up and we will get you a mike mic. Lees introduce yourself and make it a question. My name is kevin. Im asking about the taft hartley selfinsured plans. Be covered byo insurance with the raising of the lifetime and it, the lifetime limit, the lifetime cap . Do under the law have to comply with all the requirements that insurance plans have to comply with. , thats whatap youre asking about . The answer is yes. Starting 2014, there have been questions about whether tafthartley plans can qualify for subsidies. I think the answer to that is no. This will be one of many areas where there will continue to be questions. I believe under current law it does have to comply. On twitter, the challenges of the aca, thats what we been talking about the entire time. I guess i have a selfish question in terms of august. You that i am so well organized and prepared that i sent my husband out to buy the School Supplies yesterday. I will get the right ones next week. [laughter] im sure he appreciates your confidence. Its a training process. 17 years. We are getting there. [laughter] 2009. Ill never forget it attracted two dozen people in my sleepy town of denton, texas. We had to move it out to the parking lot, at 110 degrees. I did not want the picture on the 6 00 news to be people pounding on the door and saying, listen to us. We went out to the parking lot and talked for hours. I dont know that it will be that level. In texas, people are going to be mad about the irs and immigration and any number of things. This will probably be fairly low down on the list. Therell beuestion some discussion about this. We will likely absorb racism for not embracing the Affordable Care act criticism for not embracing the Affordable Care act. And then there is a whole issue of funding. You have the end of the fiscal year coming up, september 30. There is a nexus that will be pretty important. And we have incredible budget battles sometime before the end of the year with the federal debt limit and how that will interplay. Do i really trust the federal government to do everything they say they will do with their check took . Checkbook . Absolutely not. What if i start this expansion and there is no partner with me at the end of next year and im standing on my own . The funding questions will be some of the more heated ones. Youre in the house, you control the purse strings, why dont you just shut this down . I will likely be asked that. Quick question, is sgr happening this year or not . It will pass the full committee next wednesday and at some point we will be wrapped up with the bigger budget battles by the end of the year. The sgr was an inclusive process. Republicans and democrats worked well into the night working on this. The important thing was to get policy right. The good news was we were able to coalesce around policy. When i started, the sgr was insoluble. Question for california, from twitter. You do this outreach campaign, what is the hardest thing for people to grasp . Im paraphrasing. The Company Tortilla the laws, opportunity and obligation laws,t makes it opportunity and obligation is what makes it everyone is evaluating it through their own lens. The issue you might hope would is, to whatple extent are we in this together and do i have an obligation to participate, not because of my shortterm benefit but broader reasons . Education aign, when you hear people talking about it, you know it does not connect with the audience . I like to come back to something that has not come up, which is the importance of collaboration and communication among the different agencies in a state, between the feds and the state and between the states and private sector. Thats happening successfully in places but it could be better and is going to need to work well going forward. Back to the point about individuals, the issue of we are all in this together is maybe one reason to get insurance. It does take you back up from the level of, what does this mean for me personally, to the level of, which are we as a society doing about health care . Americans want to be in this together in terms of making sure everyone gets the coverage they need. That does not need that all americans are going to afford this version of doing it. Making it a philosophical issue will be a challenge in this environment. There are a number of people out who would say, i would like to get coverage but i dont have that much income. This looks expensive. Or, i had a policy before that. As cheaper for whatever reason im young and healthy, and so forth. They may end up not deciding. The big question is, how much the individual mandate fee will play out in all of this. I can see a lot of people deciding that theyre going to wait through this first period to see what happens. Thatme people have told me premiums may be high the first year because insurers are conservative. They dont want to move all their money. Be pricing a little higher the first year. Some are holding back to see what happens. Noting at the first year, just enrollment the pricing, there may be a hard assessment. Its hard to say. The more you can convey certainty about the policy and how well its going to work, the more competitive prices youre going to get. That worked very well in Medicare Part d and prices came down. , some statesram have done pretty well with this. For many insurers, when they dont know how many people are signing up, this is an educated look differenty from state to state in 2015 based on experiences that differ from state to state in 2014. And that could be up or down. Right. Its like an initial stock offering. Transparency has been a problem. Withholding of rules such as the essential Health Benefit until after election day people remember that. Other audience questions . Yes. Mic we are going to have interesting time at the end of the year. Fixe is the talk of the sgr being permanent. We will have the interesting confluence of the debt ceiling limit being hit, sgr coming into that and now discussion the whole Affordable Care act may become part of the debt are gearingte, we up for a fiscal cliff type scenario like we had last year. Big, but with all the drama of whether the government will be shut down in that debate occurring in november. It is ming of originally i thought it would be a september debate. The actual timeline is after enrollment begins. We are going to a long, hot december. The timing of it may interact with the aca differently. Maria, with business roundtable. Will states be seeking more funding than they receive from the federal government . How will that work . States are eligible to apply for establishment grants through august of 2014. That is particularly for states that may elect to run state based exchanges or take on certain functions. After that year, they have to be fully selfsustaining. They all have different models they are working on for self sustainability, including fees on the plan that are part of the marketplace. Some on the broader marketplace. We are looking at other creative sources, such as advertising and sponsorship. , to need to provide value their customers, and they need to be selfsustaining. The fed will not be funding the exchange. For the federal fallback states, it looks like it will be fees on the insurers. Its not going to come from the treasury after that. Time to wrap up our conversation. Thank you all for joining us. Thank you to cvs caremark for your partnership in making this event possible. Thank you for attending this morning and thank you to all of you watching the live stream. Have a great day. We will see you next time we politofor a political conversation politico conversation. [applause] [captioning performed by the national captioning institute] [captions Copyright National cable satellite corp. 2013] it is the history of Popular Culture. It is a collection of stories on the history of Popular Culture. To say popculture, its more than that. Do ive trying to been trying to do is go to into more detail of how popular politics andts sports and other arenas. Its not just about popculture. Is our have on the site stories about popular music. We had sports biography. We had history of media entities, newspaper history. There are a range of things. When i formulated the site, i purposefully cast a wide net to see what would work. Sunday with jack doyle at 8 00 on cspans q a. The house of representatives passed legislation to reduce federal oversight of ash produced from power plants. The house is done with legislative work this week, returning on tuesday. Expecting the house next week to take up the 2014 transportation and housing spending bill, and a bill dealing with student loan rates. We will get live coverage here on cspan. On capitol hill today, House Minority leader nancy pelosi was asked about san diego mayor and former representative bob filner , being accused of sexual harassment, and former congressman Anthony Weiner who is running for mayor of new york city. Is one of the most prominent democratic politicians, i am onious about your take Anthony Weiners most recent indiscretion. Shall i be thinking of you is a social issue. Kind of a guy here. I think ive spoken and acted in terms of Anthony Wiener in terms of what he was in the congress of the United States. His case and the case of maher filner, they have both natir filner, they have both admitted that they need therapy. The conduct of some of these people we are talking about is reprehensible. They are so disrespectful of women. What is stunning about it is they dont even realize. They dont have a clue. Clue. Yre clueless, get a if they need therapy, do it in private. House Speaker John Boehner also to reporters today, saying recent comments from steve king on immigration are quote, deeply offensive. Areouse republicans committed to fixing a broken immigration system. We are working on a common sense approach to ensure that the American People have confidence we are addressing these issues openly and honestly. Getting the on policy right. We fix our immigration system once and for all and help our economy grow. Want to be clear theres no place in this debate for hateful or ignorant comments from elected officials. Week,r this representative steve king made comments that were deeply offensive and wrong. What he said does not reflect the values of the American People or the Republican Party. We all need to do our work in a constructive, open, and respectful way. We can disagree without being disagreeable. Senate democrats joined republicans in passing the permanent marketbased solution on Student Loans. This bipartisan victory is a victory for students and for our economy. The past, entirely consistent with the House Republican bill that passed in may. I want to thank chairman klein, representative Virginia Foxx, further work on this issue, and the bipartisan work of senators who are members worked with. Our members worked with. All i can say is, what took you so long . The president pivoted this week to jobs as he has been known to do on occasion. Under the president s leadership, our country has fallen into the new normal of slow growth, high unemployment and stagnant wages. I think its unacceptable. The speech turned out to be all fizzle. Thats assuming if there is any sizzle left after you ever heeded the thing so many times. Heated the thing so many times. Know, House Republicans have been focused on Economic Growth and jobs since day one. The president says he wants our ideas. Here they are. Weve been at it since day one. We welcome any opportunity to work with the president. We want to expand american energy, simplify the tax code, reduce harmful regulations and fix the broken government. The president wants a better bargain, i think its a pretty good place to start. All comments and ideas where there is consensus. The president works with us to find Common Ground like he did on Student Loans, we can make real progress. I hope you will reach out and continue to work with us. Yesterday was the anniversary of the incident that led to capitol hill officers dying in defense of elected officials here. What do you think of the criticism but after that incident, this complex, this room here got built, that there is no urgency among lawmakers to do anything on gun violence . The issue of gun violence is one that has been difficult to deal with. You look at all the major incidents where you have had this type of gun violence, you will find the perpetrator had a history of mental illness. The question is, how do we keep the guns out of the hands of those who should not have them . Our committees have done a number of hearings and they continue to work on this, because it really is the link. How do we do this . As we do these background checks. Isnt that sort of language and sentiments among certain members of congress and people who support your party, isnt that indicative of the challenge of trying to pass this cover has of Immigration Reform . Were going to go through this in a common sense, stepby step way. We dont need to make this job more difficult area we have a broken system. Broken Legal Immigration system. The problem of those who are here undocumented that ought to be dealt with as well. It does make it more difficult. Im going to continue to work with members to get to a solution as opposed to those who want to do nothing. [indiscernible] [indiscernible] there are a number of things that need to be fixed. 40 of those who are here without documents came here legally. How do we fix the Legal Immigration system so it is more fair, and when we can enforce . Your hair is combed tonight, i will you. And you shaved call on you. And you shaved. Getting their. That would be a bit of an overstatement. [laughter] there seems to be a rehashing of a grand bargain on deficit reduction that coincides with the debt limit. About quoteking unquote productive meetings with president obama. Would you have a oneonone meeting with president obama regarding the debt limit . I think it is time for the congress to do its work. With the president and anyone else who is interested in fixing a spending problem that is grown entirely out of control. Debt, 700n worth of billion worth of debt this year. We have spent more than we have brought in for 55 of the last 60 years. Moving this through regular order is the right way. O do it feel the need to vote on the nsa amendment . I was opposed to it do you think any changes would be appropriate when the patriot act is reactivated . These nsa programs have helped keep americans safe. In my view, there are ample safeguards to protect the privacy of the American People. I know how these programs have worked. I know how they have worked to help protect the American People and i felt very strongly about them. The current risks could not avoid the debate. Members wanted to have this debate. I wanted the house to have this debate. We did. The amendment was defeated. Im proud of my colleagues who stood up for what i think they that iswas the program working to protect the American People. Do you feel that mr. Kings comments are so offensive that it rises to the level of needing to remove them from the Judiciary Committee or take other steps made myself clear when it comes to mr. King. Would it be productive in debt ceiling negotiations over the continuing resolution to try and get the president to revisit funding or obamacare . In my view, its driving up the cost of Health Insurance. It is denying people access to quality care and killing jobs in america. That is why we voted 39, 40 defund or defund to repeal obamacare. The president has signed seven changes to obamacare in the law. That would never have happened had it not been for our continued efforts to defund this and repeal it. As we get into the fall, were to point outinue what i think are big flaws in the system. You provide big subsidies through these exchanges without verifying peoples income . Our job is to protect the , to spend their taxpayer money wisely. It is wide open for abuse. It is just one of the number of issues i expect we will continue to work on as we try to do everything we can to make sure this does not go into effect. [indiscernible] we will continue to do everything we can to defund it, repeal it, make sure that the American People are not put through this experience. Topic, the senator once the continuing resolution to include language of the. Andate do you agree with the remarks that funding for the individual mandate should be halted . Been madesion has about how were going to deal with continuing resolution next month. T thank you. Last week iowa congressman steve king said for every illegal immigrant who was a high school valedictorian, there are 100 Illegal Immigrants who are drug smugglers. During a speech on the house floor, congressman king challenged those who disagreed with his statement to debate him. Heres a look at his comments. Rom earlier today want to talk about this country we have, this civilization. The foundations of our simulation and what is required to retain and enhance them and move this country beyond the shining city on the hill and to a place beyond their. Reagan described it as an america that is, at america that was and is and were always challenged by the dream. He did not articulate something beyond the shining city. Societies must progress and those for progress the most effectively and can be sustained the longest need to be built upon solid pillars. Hill,ining city on the standing true and strong, was built on a solid foundation. The foundation are the pillars of american exceptionalism. Those pillars are listed in the bill of rights. Enterprisethat free capitalism, judeochristian values, the foundation of our culture that welcomes all , and the dream that inspired legal immigrants to come to america. Visiont dream within the of the image of the statue of liberty. Dream, theamerican American Country we are, and the Foundation Upon which we have to build our american future. But how did we get here . How was it our Founding Fathers came to a conclusion that we would have freedom of speech, religion, assembly, the right to keep and bear arms, freedom of the press, that we would have Property Rights on the Fourth Amendment rights against search and seizure, that we would not have to face any kind of jury but a jury of our peers and we would not suffer double jeopardy blind andice would be every person standing before the law would be treated equally. We see lady Justice Holding the scales of justice perfectly balanced. It is almost always shown to us blindfolded because justice is blind. Justice is not a feeling. It is something that has to be delivered by the law. These are pillars of american as are thosem, rights that are not enumerated in the constitution. Powers that wed have. Or, there are some power still a gated to the presidency presidency, executive branch. And we have the Judicial Branch delegated to the presidency, executive branch. And we have the Judicial Branch. We have adapted to those principles more often than we have adapted our constitutional principles. Our Founding Fathers got it right. How could it happen that these Founding Fathers could come together on what was an obscure place on the planet and get these ideas so well articulated that they could be the foundation of the greatest nation the world has seen, the strongest economy the world has seen, the most dominant culture and civilization, the furthest reach in our economy, in our influence strategically . How did this all happen . I would take you back to think about the formation of modern history. I take you back to mosaic law, before the time of christ. When moses, who looks down upon us right now, the only face looking directly at us from all of these phases of law providers in history, moses looks down over this chamber in full face. And he is looking back here and he sees, as we should see, in god we trust. How did that come together . When moses came down from the mount with the law. Gods law. And the foundation of that law, the weight was separated out through the tribes and the way the law and justice was delivered emerged out of mosaic law that also appeared in greek law. Greeks, masterful people as they were, they were shaping the age of reason. Informedsaic law that the greek age of reason, and the age of reason where i imagine that socrates and plato and sat around and challenged each other intellectually like gunslingers did in the west with guns. And young philosophers would go up to socrates and challenge him with their philosophy. Socrates would take it apart. He was the top guy. And he informed others. As they were proud and prideful of their ability to reason and the culture of greece at the time, they had to infuse mosaic law to uphold their rationale. Were teased by other greeks who said, you got that from moses. As civilization is progressing, the law was handed down, it the greekom civilization, and they are talking about the foundation of western civilization. Roman law was emerging as well. I take you to the time of christ. O the time of christ. He talked about the values of repentens and redemption that didnt exist in the form before then and that has gifted us. I talk a